DOD’s Financial Management Regulation provides  instructions for the formulation and presentation of the budget request to  Congress, including general categories of costs that might be included in  program specific budgets. Several Factors Affect the Workforce Size, Composition, and Mix, As Well As the Organizational Structure of Selected DOD Acquisition Programs

Several interrelated factors influenced the workforce size, composition,  and mix, as well as the organizational structure of the 11 major defense  acquisition programs we reviewed. Program workforce mix varied depending on the use of contractor  personnel, which was based on the workload requirements and the  availability of government personnel to provide the skills needed. Programs were generally structured as either stand-alone—new, high  priority, complex weapon system platforms with dedicated  personnel—or as part of a portfolio of related programs to share  personnel across programs. First, we found programs that assume more responsibility for technical  development and integration have more personnel—primarily those that  perform engineering as well as test and evaluation functions. A program’s total development and procurement cost was not necessarily  related to the number of personnel supporting the program for the 11  programs we reviewed. Program officials told us that while they generally try to use civilian or  military personnel to meet workload requirements, they use contractor  support when the number of government personnel allocated to the  program is not sufficient to meet their needs, the technical skills are not  available or are limited within the government, or to fulfill short-term tasks  that are too brief to justify hiring government personnel. As a result,  program officials stated that they used program funds to pay for  contractor support personnel to partially offset the government civilian  staffing shortfalls. We found  that over two-thirds of the contractors that supported the 11 selected  programs we reviewed were performing engineering and technical  functions. Military Departments Structured Selected Acquisition Programs to Leverage Available Personnel with the Necessary Skills

While differences existed in the organizational structure of the 11  programs we reviewed, we identified factors that affected which of the two  common approaches the military departments used to leverage available  personnel with the necessary skills:
New, high priority, complex weapon system platforms that require a  significant amount of development and integration, such as the Navy’s  Columbia and the Army’s Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle, are  structured as distinct standalone program offices with dedicated  program personnel. The Air Force’s MGUE  program is managed within the GPS program office, which also  manages other GPS satellite and ground system programs. Personnel Costs for Selected DOD Acquisition Programs Are Included in Multiple Parts of the Budget Justification Documents and Are Not Specifically Identified for Individual Programs

The personnel costs for each major defense acquisition program we  reviewed are included in different parts of the President’s annual budget  request, including budget justification documents, but are not always  clearly identifiable due to different approaches used to report such costs. The DOD Financial Management Regulation gives the military  departments flexibility in how they submit program personnel costs. In reviewing DOD’s budget  requests for fiscal years 2018 and 2019 associated with the 11 selected  programs, we found that personnel costs are budgeted for in two main  wayscentrally by the military department, or by an individual  programdepending on whether the requests are for military, civilian, or  contractor support services. Table 2 shows how each military  department funds military and civilian personnel and contractor support  services for major defense acquisition programs.
Why GAO Did This Study

In 2018, DOD estimated that its 82 major defense acquisition programs would cost over $1.69 trillion in total to acquire. DOD relies on program offices—composed of civilian, military and contractor support personnel—to manage and oversee these technically complex programs.
GAO was asked to review factors affecting DOD's personnel needs for its acquisition programs and how DOD budgets for the costs associated with these personnel.
This report describes (1) factors affecting the workforce size, composition, and mix of contractor and government personnel, as well as organizational structure for selected programs; and (2) how personnel costs associated with those selected programs are included in DOD's budget justification documents.
GAO reviewed DOD acquisition, workforce, and financial management policies and regulations and identified a non-generalizable sample of 11 major defense acquisition programs, including programs from each military department that were recently approved to enter into system development. GAO requested information from each of these programs to identify the number and type of personnel supporting the program, reviewed program documentation, and interviewed program officials. GAO also reviewed DOD's budget justification documents for fiscal years 2018 and 2019.

What GAO Found

The workforce size, composition, and mix, as well as the organizational structure of the 11 Department of Defense (DOD) major defense acquisition programs GAO reviewed were influenced by several interrelated factors. These factors include the government's role in developing and integrating key technologies, the availability of government personnel to provide the skills needed, and whether the program was managed as part of a portfolio of related programs or as a stand-alone program. For example, programs that assumed more responsibility for developing and integrating key technologies generally had a larger workforce, which was primarily composed of engineering and technical personnel. Program officials GAO met with stated that they generally prefer to use government personnel, but use contractor support when the number of government personnel allocated to the program is not sufficient to meet their needs, the technical skills are not available or are limited within the government, or to fulfill short-term tasks that are too brief to justify hiring government personnel. GAO also found that DOD structured the 11 programs to allow them to leverage available personnel with the necessary skills. Two programs were structured as standalone programs because they were new, high priority, and complex. The other nine programs were managed as a part of a portfolio of related programs. For example, the Air Force's F-15 program office manages a number of programs that add capabilities to the existing system.
DOD's Financial Management Regulation, which governs the formulation and presentation of DOD's budget request, gives DOD flexibility in how it submits program personnel costs. Consequently, the personnel costs for the 11 programs GAO reviewed were not separately and distinctly identified from other costs. For example, costs for civilian and military personnel are often centrally funded through appropriations categories that support many DOD activities and do not provide information on specific program personnel costs. GAO also found that costs for contractor support are often combined with other costs in individual program budget exhibits.