The Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Equal Opportunity (DASD(EO)) is primarily responsible for monitoring the services’ equal opportunity programs, including preparing written analyses of the services’ MEOAs and a DOD summary. While MEOAs provide some useful information, the analyses of this information did not consistently identify and assess the significance of possible racial or gender disparities. Certain Useful Data Is Not Required for Two MEOA Categories

Two important factors in analyzing the progression of minorities and women in the services are how competitive they are for promotions and whether they are leaving the services at disproportionate rates. Although DOD’s MEOA guidance requires reporting on promotions and separations, it does not require the services to report racial and gender data for all promotions or voluntary separations. Further analysis would be necessary to determine why the disparities occurred. Using these eligible pools, we found statistically significant racial and gender disparities that may warrant further analysis. Although these policies and procedures do not apply to active-duty military personnel, the Department of Defense (DOD) directive and instruction related to its military equal opportunity program set forth similar requirements.
Why GAO Did This Study

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO reviewed the services' Military Equal Opportunity Assessments (MEOA) to determine whether certain active-duty personnel data reflect racial and gender disparities within the services.

What GAO Found

GAO found that: (1) MEOA do not consistently identify and assess the significance of possible racial and gender disparities within the services; (2) MEOA categories are reported differently by each service, since the services are not required to report data on low rank promotions and voluntary separations; (3) the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Equal Opportunity (DASD EO) has not analyzed the services' MEOA or Department of Defense (DOD) summaries for fiscal year 1993; (4) there are significant statistical disparities in the number of minorities considered for accessioning, career enhancement, and promotion; and (5) some of these disparities can be attributed to job-related and societal factors.