Force Structure:
US Army's Efforts to Improve Efficiency
of Institutional Forces
Have Produced Few Results

Appendix 3: Comments From the Department of Defense

by GAO

OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY OF DEFENSE
4000 DEFENSE PENTAGON
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20301-40W

JAN 23 1998

Mr. Richard Davis
Director, National Security Analysis
National Security and International Affairs Division
U.S. General Accounting Office
Washington, DC 20548

Dear Mr. Davis:

This is the Department of Defense (DoD) response to the General Accounting Office (GAO) draft report, "FORCE STRUCTURE: Army Efforts to Improve Efficiency of Institutional Forces Have Produced Few Results," dated December 23, 1997, (GAO Code 701112/OSD Case1512). The DoD generally concurs with the report. Specific comments related to each recommendation are attached. Technical and additional Army written comments were separately provided to GAO staff-, however, they do not represent an official DoD position.

The Department appreciates the opportunity to comment on the GAO draft report and requests the reprinting of the DoD response to the draft as Appendix II of the final report. My point of contact on this matter is Ms. Nina Richman-Loo.

Sincerely,
Jeanne B. Fites
Deputy Under Secretary of Defense
(Program Integration)

GAO DRAFT REPORT DATED DECEMBER 23, 1997
(GAO CODE 701112) OSD CASE 1512

"FORCE STRUCTURE: ARMY EFFORTS TO IMPROVE EFFICIENCY OF INSTITUTIONAL FORCES HAVE PRODUCED FEW RESULTS"
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE COMMENTS TO THE GAO RECOMMENDATIONS

RECOMMENDATION 1:

To improve the Army's ability to accurately project

Institutional requirements, allocate Institutional personnel, and make informed analysisbased decisions on risks and tradeoffs, the GAO recommended that the Secretary of the Army complete subplans of the material weakness plan, modify the milestones to accurately reflect available resources to accomplish corrective actions, and closely monitor results. (page 32/GAO Draft Report)

DOD RESPONSE:

Concur. The Office, Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness will request that the Secretary of the Army ensure that subplans of the material weakness plan are completed, that milestones are modified to accurately reflect available resources to accomplish corrective actions, and closely monitor results.

RECOMMENDATION 2:

To improve the Army's ability to accurately project Institutional requirements derived from its workload-based computer system (the Army Workload Performance System, or AWPS), the GAO recommended that the Secretary of the Army direct the Assistant Secretary for Manpower and Reserve Affairs to develop a long range master plan to implement AWPS, including milestones and definitions of corporate level requirements.

DOD RESPONSE:

Concur. The Office, Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness will request that the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Manpower and Reserve Affairs develop a long range master plan to implement AWPS, including milestones and corporate-level requirements.

RECOMMENDATION 3:

To improve the Army's ability to make informed, analysisbased decisions on benefits, and tradeoffs in realigning major command organizations and functions, the GAO recommended that the Secretary of the Army require that workload-based analysis, such as the 12 Step approach, be used to demonstrate the benefits, risks, and tradeoffs of Force XXI Institutional Redesign decisions.

DOD RESPONSE:

Concur. The Office, Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness will request that the Secretary of the Army take appropriate action to ensure that workload-based analyses, such as the 12 step approach, be used to demonstrate the benefits, risks, and tradeoffs of Force XXI Institutional Redesign decisions.

RECOMMENDATION 4:

To improve the Army's ability to oversee reforms for increasing Table of Distribution and Allowances (TDA) effectiveness and efficiency, the GAO recommended that the Secretary of the Army assign a single office the responsibility to provide management and oversight of the Institutional Redesign process to include identifying clear, specific, and measurable performance goals; publishing those goals in a final Pamphlet 100xx; monitoring savings and implementation costs; and periodically reporting results achieved compared with stated goals and projections of the initiatives' savings and implementation costs. (page 32/Draft GAO Report)

DOD RESPONSE:

Concur. The Office, Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness will request that the Army take steps to ensure that savings and implementation costs associated with the Infrastructure Redesign process are captured and compared to measurable performance goals.


Back to Table of Contents Force Structure US Army
Back to GAO List of Issues
Back to MagWeb Magazine List
© Copyright 1998 by US GAO.
This article appears in MagWeb.com (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web.
Other articles from military history and related magazines are available at http://www.magweb.com