In  the agreement development phase, for an FMS case, the implementing  agency, with input from the partner country, develops an assistance  agreement called a Letter of Offer and Acceptance (LOA). DOD Has Improved the Timeliness of the FMS Process but Has Not Met Its Goals or Sufficiently Analyzed Performance Data

DSCA has established three measures of performance relating to FMS  case duration but has not met its goals for two of these metrics and does  not collect information on the third. The first metric tracks the time taken  from the receipt of a partner country’s request to the transmission of a  completed LOA to the partner country for approval. DOD’s timeliness has  improved, but it is not meeting this metric’s goal of 85 percent of LOAs  sent to partner countries within established time frames. The second metric is the time taken for the review of FMS cases as they  are processed through DSCA headquarters. The third metric is the time taken for DOD to deliver the first item or  service on an FMS case to the recipient country. The Military Departments’ Workload and Workforce Have Increased While DSCA’s Workforce Has Declined, and DSCA Has Not Developed a Workforce Plan

During fiscal year 2009 through 2016, the military departments’ FMS  workload and workforce generally increased; over the same time period,  DSCA, which does not have workload measures for its FMS workforce as  a whole, experienced a decrease in its workforce. DSCA officials  said that the drop in personnel has not adversely affected their capacity to  process FMS and pseudo-FMS. DSCA Has Not Developed a Workforce Plan or Workload Measures for its FMS Workforce As A Whole

DSCA has not developed a workforce plan, although it is required to do  so. DOD Has Taken Steps to Address Recommendations Made by GAO and Others to Improve the FMS Process

DOD has taken some steps to address long-standing concerns about the  timeliness of FMS delivery. GAO, DOD’s Inspector General, and others  have made numerous prior recommendations to improve the FMS  process. DOD has taken steps to address three of the recommendations  GAO made in 2012 but has yet to implement the fourth—the  establishment of a performance measure to assess timeliness for the  acquisition phase of the security assistance process. However, as discussed earlier in this  report, information provided by DSCA did not include timeliness data for  the delivery phase of the process, and DSCA officials reported that they  are not collecting data for this performance metric. We found that DOD had implemented one  recommendation and partially implemented 16 recommendations, as  summarized in table 7. In that time, the FMS workforce and workloads of the three  military departments have grown significantly, while the DSCA workforce  has decreased. For the third metric established to monitor the  timeliness of the delivery phase, DSCA is not collecting data and  therefore does not know how it is performing against this goal. In partially concurring with our first recommendation, DOD stated that  it intends to rescind or replace, in the near future, the metric  established to measure the time DOD takes to deliver the first items to  recipient countries. DOD commented that collecting data on when the  first spare part or support equipment is delivered does not provide  meaningful data. While we agree  that these actions are useful for DOD to oversee the execution of  security assistance, we continue to believe that DOD needs to  improve its analysis of performance data in order to identify the root  causes of any delays and determine the steps needed to improve the  timeliness of the process. This report  assesses (1) the extent to which the Department of Defense (DOD) has  met performance goals with respect to the timeliness of the FMS process,  (2) DOD’s FMS workforce planning efforts and fiscal year 2009 through  2016 FMS workload and workforce trends, and (3) the actions DOD has  taken to address recommendations made since 2009 to improve FMS. To assess the extent to which established  performance goals have been met, we reviewed and summarized  performance data and interviewed officials from DSCA. Foreign partners may pay the  U.S. government to administer the acquisition of materiel and services on  their behalf through the FMS program. The Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) did not provide a  breakout of official sales data by military department but did provide these  data in the aggregate.
Why GAO Did This Study

U.S. national security benefits from the timely provision of military equipment and services that enable foreign partners and allies to build or enhance their security capability. State has overall responsibility for the FMS program, while DOD administers the program through DSCA and implementing agencies in the military departments. Since 2009, DSCA has taken steps to improve the timeliness of the FMS process, but concerns remain that the delivery of FMS equipment is not timely, leaving foreign partners waiting for items needed to achieve security objectives.
House and Senate committees requested that GAO assess the FMS process. This report assesses (1) the extent to which DOD has met FMS timeliness goals, (2) FMS workload and workforce trends, and (3) actions DOD has taken to address recommendations to improve the FMS process made by GAO and others. GAO analyzed performance data for FMS from 2012 to 2016; workforce and workload data from the military departments; reviewed relevant DOD regulations and policies for FMS; and interviewed DOD officials.

What GAO Found

The Department of Defense's (DOD) performance on Foreign Military Sales (FMS) has improved, but DOD is not meeting two out of three performance metrics for the timely processing of FMS requests and does not collect data for the third metric. The first metric tracks the time taken from the receipt of a country's request for an item to when a Letter of Offer and Acceptance (LOA) is sent to the partner country for approval. As shown in the table, this metric is based on the complexity of the requests, and although DOD's timeliness has improved, it is still short of the 85 percent goal. The second missed metric is the time the Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) takes to review and approve FMS cases. The review time in 2016 was more than the 1 day goal. The third metric is the time DOD takes to deliver the first item to the recipient country; however, DSCA does not collect data on this metric and therefore does not know if it is meeting the goal. DOD officials cited several factors that adversely affect their ability to meet the timeliness goals, such as changing customer requirements or delays due to policy concerns regarding particular sales. However, because DOD has not collected data on one metric and has not identified the underlying causes for not meeting its goals, it does not know the extent to which these or other factors are impacting program delivery.
During fiscal years 2009 through 2016, the FMS workload increased and while the three military services' FMS workforces generally increased, DSCA's FMS workforce decreased. DSCA officials do not believe the size of their workforce has impacted timeliness; but the data provided to GAO shows that DSCA's timeliness has decreased as the size of its FMS workforce has decreased. A key principle of strategic workforce planning is that an agency's workforce must be aligned with its workload. However, DSCA lacks workload measures for its FMS workforce as a whole, and therefore cannot ensure that its workforce is sufficient to meet programmatic goals. Moreover, despite a DOD requirement, DSCA has not yet developed a workforce plan that could help identify any skill or competency gaps in its workforce. Officials said they planned to do so by the end of May 2018.
DOD has a taken some steps to address recommendations to improve the FMS process, but additional actions are still needed. For example, DOD implemented three of GAO's prior recommendations, such as establishing performance metrics, but has yet to establish a metric to assess timeliness of the acquisition phase. DOD has partially implemented several of the recommendations made by an internal DOD task force. For example, DOD has partially implemented the recommendations to enhance the skills of the FMS workforce. In addition, DSCA's efforts to standardize data that are maintained separately by the military services on a new information system have fallen behind schedule.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that DSCA (1) collect data on delivery of items or services, (2) analyze FMS performance metric data to determine why goals have not been met, (3) develop a DSCA workforce plan, and (4) develop DSCA workload measures. DOD partially concurred with the first two recommendations, concurred with the third, and did not concur with the fourth. GAO continues to believe action is needed as discussed in the report.