DOD was not required to collaborate with DNI in developing the  2004 strategy. Space S&T Strategy Addresses Most Statutory Requirements, but Lacks Robust Detail

Our comparison of the strategy against the statutory reporting  requirements found that the strategy addresses eight statutory  requirements and DOD has plans to address two other statutory  requirements. While the requirements were met, additional information that  could enable DOD to successfully implement the strategy was not  included. Specifically, in relation to the strategy’s goals, it does not  establish a newly developed implementation plan for the achievement of  the goals. Instead, the strategy describes a plan for implementation  where DOD components essentially implement the strategy as a routine  element of their existing program planning and budgeting procedures  while employing processes that are specifically tailored to each  component’s mission function. However, officials explained that research components  and research laboratories would do these activities as part of the normal  DOD budgetary process. Though  prioritization is not a statutory requirement, given the breadth and scope  of space S&T development activities and issues we have identified in the  past with respect to a lack of coordination and prioritization, it is  important, and indeed a best practice, that goals be prioritized. Fundamental Challenges Facing the Space S&T Community and Best Practices Not Addressed

While the content of the space S&T strategy meets statutory  requirements, it does not address fundamental challenges facing the  space S&T community. These challenges include human capital  shortages, growing fiscal pressures, and the difficulty in transitioning  space S&T to acquisition programs.   Establish Process for Revising Goals in the Future: Criteria to  establish and revise goals could help to improve performance and  results. Coordination Efforts in Strategy Development Were Limited and Implementation Efforts Are too Early to Assess

Although most organizations involved with the space S&T strategy  participated significantly in developing its short- and long-term goals,  participation among some organizations in developing other aspects of  the strategy was more limited. DOD and DNI officials told GAO that their  interpretation of the 2009 statute directing development of the strategy  was that it did not require that the intelligence community be involved to  the full extent in some aspects of the strategy. Together, the intelligence community and  these other agencies conduct a significant amount of space S&T  development. By limiting their involvement, DOD may have missed an  opportunity to leverage these activities and optimize its own S&T  spending. Also, since the strategy has only recently been issued, it is too  early to evaluate the effectiveness of the coordination mechanisms  planned to implement the strategy. Recommendations for Executive Action

To optimize government investment in space S&T and address key  challenges, we recommend that the Secretary of Defense (who would  direct the Assistant Secretary of Defense, Research and Engineering and  the DOD Executive Agent for Space) and the Director of National  Intelligence make the following three improvements to enhance the next  version of the space S&T strategy:    Develop a specific implementation plan that provides a detailed  process for achieving the strategy’s goals. Include information on required human capital; required funding;  prioritization; ways to measure progress against the goals; and  process(es) for revising goals to address the challenges in space  S&T. We also  met with DOD and DNI officials to discuss and collect information on the  methods, approaches, and analyses used to support the content of the  strategy. To determine the extent of coordination efforts used to develop and  implement the strategy, we discussed the coordination methods used in  the strategy’s development with officials from the Office of Assistant  Secretary of Defense, Research and Engineering (formerly the Director,  Defense Research and Engineering); Office of the Director of National  Intelligence (including National Reconnaissance Office officials); Defense  Advanced Research Projects Agency; Missile Defense Agency; Army  Materiel Command; Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for  Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology; Army Space and Missile and  Defense Command; Naval Research Laboratory; Office of Naval  Research; Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for  Acquisition; Air Force Research Laboratory; and the Department of  Energy. We also reviewed other relevant high-level space strategic plans  including the National Security Strategy, the National Security Space  Strategy, the Quadrennial Defense Review, the National Space Policy,  the Defense Science and Technology Strategy, the DOD Research and  Engineering Strategic Plan, and the DOD Space Science and Technology  Strategy (2004).
Why GAO Did This Study

Each year, the United States spends billions of dollars on space-based systems to support national security activities. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 requires the Department of Defense (DOD) and the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) to develop and issue a space science and technology (S&T) strategy every 2 years addressing S&T goals and a process for achieving these goals, among other requirements. As GAO is required to assess the strategy, this report addresses (1) the extent to which the strategy meets the statutory requirements, (2) if other approaches could be used to enhance the usefulness of the strategy, and (3) the extent of coordination efforts used in developing the strategy. GAO reviewed the strategy for sufficiency with statutory requirements and met with DOD and DNI officials to discuss the analyses and coordination used to support the content of the strategy. GAO also compared the strategy to strategic planning best practices to see if there are ways it could be improved.

What GAO Found

The space science and technology strategy addresses eight statutory requirements, and DOD plans to address the two remaining requirements. While the statutory requirements were addressed, additional information that could have enhanced the strategy was not always included. For example, in relation to the strategy's goals, a newly developed implementation plan for the achievement of the goals was not established. Instead, the strategy describes a plan for implementation where DOD components implement the strategy as a routine element of their existing budgetary process. Also, the strategy's new goals were established without any prioritization, and while this was not required, given the breadth and scope of space S&T development activities, it is important that goals be prioritized. For the statutory requirements involving strategy implementation, officials explained that while the requirements to identify S&T projects with associated funding and schedule information were not addressed in the strategy, components and research laboratories conduct these activities as part of the normal DOD budgetary process. While the content of the strategy addresses statutory requirements, it does not address fundamental challenges facing the space S&T community. These challenges have been identified in high-level studies and prior GAO reports and include human capital shortages, growing fiscal pressures, and the difficulty in transitioning space S&T to acquisition programs. In this assessment, GAO identified some strategic planning best practices that, if used, could improve future strategy versions by addressing these fundamental challenges and thereby potentially enhancing the usefulness of the strategy. These practices include identifying required human capital; identifying required funding; prioritizing initiatives; establishing ways to measure progress; and establishing processes for revising goals in the future. Organizations involved in development of the strategy participated in creating its short- and long-term goals; however, their participation in developing other aspects of the strategy was more limited. DOD and DNI officials told GAO that their interpretation of the 2009 statute directing development of the strategy was that it did not require that the intelligence community be involved to the full extent in some aspects of the strategy. Moreover, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) together with the intelligence community, conduct a significant amount of space S&T. Although NASA and NOAA participation is not required, DOD may have missed an opportunity to leverage these agencies' activities and optimize its own S&T spending by involving them in strategy development. GAO was also required to evaluate the effectiveness of the coordination mechanisms planned to implement the strategy. However, because the strategy has only recently been issued, it is too early to make such an evaluation.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that DOD and DNI develop a more specific implementation plan; include additional information and prioritization, ways to measure progress, and processes for revision when establishing strategic planning goals; and enhance coordination among the DOD S&T community, the intelligence community, NASA, and NOAA. DOD concurred with the recommendations and DNI had no comment.