Defense Space Activities: Management Actions Are Needed to Better
Identify, Track, and Train Air Force Space Personnel (21-SEP-06, 
GAO-06-908).							 
                                                                 
The Department of Defense (DOD) relies on space to support a wide
range of vital military missions. Many factors contribute to DOD 
success in space activities, and having sufficient quantities of 
space-qualified personnel to design, oversee, and acquire space  
assets, on which DOD expects to spend about $20 billion in fiscal
year 2007, is critical to DOD's ability to carry out its mission.
The individual services are responsible for providing adequately 
qualified space personnel to meet mission needs. The Air Force	 
provides over 90 percent of the space personnel to DOD's mission,
but has not identified the space acquisition workforce. This	 
report examines the extent to which (1) the Air Force's space	 
acquisition workforce is managed using a strategic workforce	 
management approach, (2) there are sufficient numbers of Air	 
Force space acquisition personnel to meet DOD's national security
needs, and (3) the Air Force's space acquisition personnel are	 
adequately qualified for their positions. For its analysis, GAO  
identified the space acquisition workforce as those Air Force	 
scientists, engineers, and program managers with experience	 
developing space assets.					 
-------------------------Indexing Terms------------------------- 
REPORTNUM:   GAO-06-908 					        
    ACCNO:   A61251						        
  TITLE:     Defense Space Activities: Management Actions Are Needed  
to Better Identify, Track, and Train Air Force Space Personnel	 
     DATE:   09/21/2006 
  SUBJECT:   Defense capabilities				 
	     Defense procurement				 
	     Military officers					 
	     Military personnel 				 
	     Military training					 
	     Personnel management				 
	     Policy evaluation					 
	     Procurement planning				 
	     Strategic planning 				 
	     Training utilization				 
	     Space operations					 

******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a  **
** GAO Product.                                                 **
**                                                              **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced.  Tables are included, but    **
** may not resemble those in the printed version.               **
**                                                              **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when     **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed     **
** document's contents.                                         **
**                                                              **
******************************************************************
GAO-06-908

     

     * Results in Brief
     * Background
          * Acquisition Workforce Management Concerns
          * Trends in Science and Engineering Degrees
          * Air Force Role in Space Acquisition
          * Space Acquisition Workforce Is Not Defined as a Distinct Wor
     * Air Force Has Done Some Space and Acquisition Workforce Plan
          * Air Force Actions to Address the Strategic Planning Model Ar
          * Efforts regarding Skill Sets, Training, and Career Path Deve
          * Efforts regarding Recruitment and Promotion
          * The Air Force Does Not Have an Integrated Zero-Based Needs A
     * Air Force May Not Have Enough Space Acquisition Personnel to
          * Air Force May Not Have Sufficient Numbers of Mid- and Senior
          * Shortages Are Due to 1990s Reductions in Acquisition Personn
     * Air Force's Existing Space Acquisition Personnel May Not Be
          * SMC Acquisition Officers Have Fewer Higher Certification Lev
          * Differences in SMC Space Acquisition Personnel and Personnel
          * Lower Levels of Education and Experience in Space Acquisitio
               * NRO Priority in Selecting Qualified Space Acquisition Person
               * Lack of a Designated Career Field
               * Decrease in Acquisition Officers with Technical Degrees Ente
               * Limited Space Acquisition Training
     * Conclusions
     * Recommendations for Executive Action
     * Agency Comments and Our Evaluation
     * Appendix I: Scope and Methodology
     * Appendix II: Comments from the Department of Defense
     * Appendix III: Comments from the National Reconnaissance Offi
          * GAO Comment
     * Appendix IV: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments
          * GAO Contact
          * Acknowledgments
               * Order by Mail or Phone

Report to the Chairman, Subcommittee on Strategic Forces, Committee on
Armed Services, House of Representatives

United States Government Accountability Office

GAO

September 2006

DEFENSE SPACE ACTIVITIES

Management Actions Are Needed to Better Identify, Track, and Train Air
Force Space Personnel

GAO-06-908

Contents

Letter 1

Results in Brief 7
Background 11
Air Force Has Done Some Space and Acquisition Workforce Planning, but
Lacks an Integrated Zero-Based Needs Assessment 20
Air Force May Not Have Enough Space Acquisition Personnel to Meet National
Security Space Needs 23
Air Force's Existing Space Acquisition Personnel May Not Be Technically
Proficient in Ways Needed to Meet National Security Space Needs 31
Conclusions 43
Recommendations for Executive Action 44
Agency Comments and Our Evaluation 45
Appendix I Scope and Methodology 49
Appendix II Comments from the Department of Defense 53
Appendix III Comments from the National Reconnaissance Office 56
Appendix IV GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments 60

Figures

Figure 1: Overview of DOD Space Acquisition Workforce 5
Figure 2: Trends in Overall Science and Engineering Degrees Awarded to
U.S. Citizens and Permanent Residents 13
Figure 3: Engineering Degrees Awarded to U.S. Citizens and Permanent
Residents 14
Figure 4: Composition of the Workforce at SMC 16
Figure 5: Fiscal Year 2006 Authorized and Assigned Totals for Air Force
Acquisition Managers by Rank 24
Figure 6: Fiscal Year 2006 Authorizations for Acquisition Personnel by
Rank at SMC and for the Air Force Overall 26
Figure 7: Acquisition Certification Levels at SMC, 1996-2005 32
Figure 8: Acquisition Certification Levels for Acquisition Officers at SMC
and the Air Force 34
Figure 9: Space Professional Certification Levels for SMC Space
Acquisition Workforce 35
Figure 10: Acquisition Certification Levels for Classified and SMC Space
Acquisition Workforces 36
Figure 11: Space Certification Levels for Classified and SMC Space
Acquisition Workforces 37

Abbreviations

AFSC Air Force Specialty Code APDP Acquisition Professional Development
Program CLM Continuous Learning Module DAU Defense Acquisition University
DAWIA Defense Acquisition Workforce Improvement Act DOD Department of
Defense FFRDC Federally Funded Research and Development Center NRO
National Reconnaissance Office NSF National Science Foundation NSSI
National Security Space Institute SETA Scientific and Engineering
Technical Assistance SMC Space and Missile Systems Center

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without further permission from GAO. However, because this
work may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this material
separately.

United States Government Accountability Office

Washington, DC 20548

September 21, 2006

The Honorable Terry Everett Chairman Subcommittee on Strategic Forces
Committee on Armed Services House of Representatives

Dear Mr. Chairman:

The Department of Defense (DOD) relies on space to support a wide range of
vital military missions, including intelligence collection; battlefield
surveillance and management; global command, control, and communications;
and navigation assistance. Having sufficient quantities of space-qualified
personnel-the "space cadre"-available to design, acquire, and oversee the
production of space assets, on which DOD expects to spend about $20
billion in fiscal year 2007, is critical to DOD's and the individual
warfighter's ability to carry out their missions. In order to ensure that
access to space remains reliable and unfettered, DOD has stated that it
will improve responsive space access; satellite operations; and other
space-enabling capabilities, such as the space industrial base, space
science and technology efforts, and space-qualified personnel.

Congress has long been concerned about DOD's management and organization
of space activities, and it chartered a commission in 1999-known as the
Space Commission-to review national security space activities. In its
January 2001 report, the Space Commission noted that DOD needs a total
force composed of well-educated, motivated, and competent personnel to
work on space operations, requirements, and acquisition, but that DOD was
not yet on course to develop the space cadre the nation needs.1 The
commission warned that many experienced personnel were retiring and that
recruitment and retention of space-qualified personnel was a problem. In
implementing the commission's recommendations, the Secretary of Defense
gave the services the responsibility to develop and maintain sufficient
quantities of space-qualified personnel.2 To better manage its space
systems and acquisition of major space programs, DOD issued a directive
that established an Executive Agent for Space in June 2003 to develop,
coordinate, and integrate plans and programs for space systems and for the
acquisition of space major defense acquisition programs.3 Currently, the
Under Secretary of the Air Force serves as the DOD Executive Agent for
Space. In February 2004, DOD issued its space human capital strategy that
set overall goals for developing and integrating space personnel, and that
year Congress also directed the Secretary of the Air Force to establish
and implement policies and procedures to develop a career field for Air
Force officers with technical competence in space-related matters.4

1 Department of Defense, Space Commission, Report of the Commission to
Assess United States National Security Space Management and Organization
(Washington, D.C.: Jan. 11, 2001).

We have previously reported on DOD's space human capital strategy and
efforts by the military departments to develop their space personnel.5 In
our first report, issued in August 2004, we recommended that DOD develop
an implementation plan for its strategy and that the Army and Navy develop
strategies and establish focal points for managing their space personnel.6
In response to our recommendations, DOD issued an implementation plan for
its space human capital strategy, and the Navy issued a space cadre
strategy and established a focal point. The Army has not yet implemented
our recommendations. In our second report, issued in September 2005, we
recommended that the Secretary of Defense issue agencywide guidance to
provide accountability by defining and institutionalizing space cadre
authorities and the responsibilities of the Executive Agent and the
services, and that the Secretary of Defense direct the DOD Executive Agent
for Space to develop appropriate performance measures and evaluation plans
for each service.7 As of May 2006, DOD had not implemented the
recommendations made in our 2005 report.

2 Secretary of Defense Memorandum, "National Security Space Management and
Organization," October 18, 2001.

3 DOD Directive 5101.2, DOD Executive Agent for Space, June 3, 2003.
Executive agent is a term used to indicate a delegation of authority by
the Secretary of Defense to a subordinate to act on the Secretary's
behalf. According to a DOD directive issued in September 2002, the nature
and scope of an executive agent's responsibilities, functions, and
authorities shall be prescribed at the time of assignment and remain in
effect until revoked or superseded. See Section 3.1, DOD Directive 5101.1,
DOD Executive Agent, September 3, 2002.

4 10 U.S.C. S: 8084.

5 In the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004, Congress
required that we submit two reports assessing DOD's space human capital
strategy and the efforts by the military departments to develop their
space personnel.

6 GAO, Defense Space Activities: Additional Actions Needed to Implement
Human Capital Strategy and Develop Space Personnel, GAO-04-697
(Washington, D.C.: Aug. 11, 2004).

Many factors, such as the use of new and unproven technology and workforce
issues, can contribute to space program delays and cost overruns. We have
recently reported that DOD's space acquisition programs have experienced
cost and schedule overruns that have postponed delivery of promised
capabilities to the warfighter; in some cases, capabilities have not been
delivered after decades of development.8 We have identified a number of
causes behind these problems, noting that among the causes that most
consistently stand out are that DOD starts more programs than it can
afford, starts programs before it has assurance of technological maturity,
and allows new requirements to be added well into the acquisition phase.
In addition, we have identified additional problems that contribute to
space acquisition problems, though less directly affecting cost and
schedule problems. These include such problems as short tenures of top
leadership and acquisition managers as well as capacity shortfalls, such
as shortages in scientists and engineers and experts in systems and
software engineering to oversee its space programs.9

Strategic human capital management is a pervasive challenge facing the
federal government. In January 2001 and again in January 2003, we
identified strategic human capital management as a governmentwide
high-risk area after finding that the lack of attention to strategic human
capital planning had undermined the federal government's ability to serve
the American people effectively.10 In the wake of extensive downsizing
performed during the early 1990s, largely without sufficient consideration
of the strategic consequences, agencies are experiencing significant
challenges to deploying the right skills, in the right places, at the
right times. With a growing number of employees who are eligible for
retirement, agencies are also finding it difficult to fill certain
mission-critical jobs-a situation that could significantly drain their
institutional knowledge.

7 GAO, Defense Space Activities: Management Guidance and Performance
Measures Needed to Develop Personnel, GAO-05-833 (Washington, D.C.: Sept.
21, 2005).

8 GAO, Space Acquisitions: Improvements Needed in Space Systems
Acquisitions and Keys to Achieving Them, GAO-06-626T (Washington, D.C.:
Apr. 6, 2006).

9 GAO-06-626T .

10 GAO, High-Risk Series: An Update, GAO-01-263 (Washington, D.C.: January
2001), and High-Risk Series: An Update, GAO-03-119 (Washington, D.C.:
January 2003).

Effectively managing today's workforce is multifaceted. The strategic
workforce planning model used by leading public and private organizations
to effectively manage their workforces includes the following five key
elements11: involving management, employees, and stakeholders; analyzing
critical skill and competency gaps between current and future workforce
needs; developing strategies to fill identified gaps; building
capabilities to address requirements; and monitoring and evaluating
progress and the contribution of strategic workforce planning efforts in
achieving goals. We also identified additional aspects of effectively
managing today's workforce, including the use of a zero-based needs
assessment to identify resources that are needed to carry out an
organization's mission. A zero-based integrated needs assessment "zeroes
out" an organization's existing resources and assesses the organization's
needs from a bottom-up approach. It often results in a clearer picture of
the resources that are needed without being encumbered by the need to
reorganize the organization's existing resource base. Other important
aspects of effectively managing a workforce include establishing career
fields to provide specific management and development of distinct
workforces, defining critical skill sets, and establishing training
requirements.

Personnel who acquire space assets-the space acquisition workforce-are not
defined as a distinct workforce or career field within DOD or the Air
Force. However, for the purposes of our review, we identified space
acquisition personnel as those belonging to either of two workforces that
DOD and the Air Force have defined-the acquisition workforce and the space
cadre workforce. These two workforces have separate management frameworks,
and each has certifications, career fields, training, and other
requirements tailored to its particular needs. Certifications help
establish and maintain professional standards. Career fields provide a
development path and identify the training and experience needed for
personnel to progress through the career field.

11 GAO, DOD Civilian Personnel: Comprehensive Strategic Workforce Plans
Needed, GAO-04-753 (Washington, D.C.: June 30, 2004).

Using the Air Force acquisition career field, we identified scientists,
engineers, and acquisition managers with experience in developing and
acquiring space assets. We determined that the Air Force accounts for more
than 90 percent of space personnel, with the remaining 10 percent
generally consisting of Army and Navy personnel. Additionally, the space
acquisition workforce includes military personnel, civilians, and
contractors. Figure 1 depicts our definition of the DOD space acquisition
workforce.

Figure 1: Overview of DOD Space Acquisition Workforce

Since the overwhelming majority of space personnel work for the Air Force,
we focused our review on that service. Overall, our analysis focused on
Air Force officers because the Air Force does not yet track civilians or
enlisted personnel to the extent that it does officers. Within the Air
Force, the space cadre workforce consists of officers in the following
career fields: space operators, scientists, engineers, and acquisition
managers. The Air Force's acquisition workforce consists of officers in
the following career fields: scientists, engineers, acquisition managers,
contracting officers, and financial managers. Using these definitions of
the acquisition and space cadre workforces, we defined the space
acquisition workforce as comprising scientists, engineers, and acquisition
managers with experience in developing and acquiring space assets.

As of April 2006, approximately 1,850 Air Force space acquisition officers
and civilians were located at the Space and Missile Systems Center (SMC),
which is part of the U.S. Air Force Space Command. About 1,300 Air Force
personnel, including approximately 340 acquisition and contracting
officers, were located at the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO), which
designs, builds, and operates the nation's reconnaissance satellites.12
NRO has no permanently assigned personnel; rather, it draws personnel on
rotational assignments from the services and the intelligence community.

In response to your request, our objectives for this report were to
determine the extent to which (1) the Air Force's space acquisition
workforce is managed using a strategic workforce planning approach, (2)
there are sufficient numbers of Air Force space acquisition personnel
available to meet DOD's national security space needs, and (3) the Air
Force's space acquisition personnel are adequately qualified for their
positions. In order to achieve these objectives, we first identified the
space acquisition workforce since, as previously mentioned, neither DOD
nor the Air Force had established this as a separate workforce. To do
this, we obtained Air Force data on the acquisition workforce and
identified those acquisition personnel who had space experience. We also
obtained Air Force data on the space cadre, and we identified those space
cadre personnel who had acquisition experience. We obtained specific
database codes in the space professional database that contains all space
cadre members, which allowed us to determine education, experience, and
expertise levels for the space acquisition workforce, and whether the
personnel were working on classified or unclassified space programs. DOD
and Air Force officials agreed with our methodology to determine the space
acquisition workforce, and we found the data we used to make this
determination to be sufficiently reliable for purposes of this review.

To determine the extent to which the Air Force's space acquisition
workforce is managed using a strategic workforce planning approach, we
identified a strategic workforce planning model used by leading
organizations.13 We then interviewed officials and obtained documentation
to find out whether strategies, plans, or both for the space acquisition
workforce exist, and if so, if they are in accordance with the accepted
strategic workforce planning model. To determine the extent to which there
are sufficient numbers of Air Force space acquisition personnel to meet
DOD's national security space needs, we interviewed officials, obtained
documentation, and analyzed Air Force Headquarters data to assess overall
trends in composition and assignments of the space acquisition workforce.
To determine the extent to which Air Force space acquisition personnel are
adequately qualified for their positions, we interviewed officials,
obtained documentation, and analyzed data from the Air Force Personnel
Center and SMC and space professional databases in order to assess the
certification and education levels of the Air Force's space acquisition
workforce.

12 For NRO, the number of acquisition officers is only an approximation
because some who are coded as acquisition officers could actually be
performing non-space acquisition duties; conversely, some who are not
coded as acquisition officers could be performing space acquisition
duties. The amounts cited represent our best estimate in the absence of
more detailed information from NRO.

13 See GAO, A Model of Strategic Human Capital Planning, GAO-02-373SP
(Washington, D.C.: Mar. 15, 2002), and National Academy of Public
Administration, Building Successful Organizations: A Guide to Strategic
Workforce Planning (Washington, D.C.: May 2000).

Part of our analysis regarding the quantity and quality of the space
acquisition workforce was limited due to the lack of NRO data. NRO did
provide us the overall number of Air Force personnel assigned to it, but
did not provide us information on the education, experience, or expertise
of NRO personnel. As a result, we could not compare the education,
experience, or expertise of the space acquisition workforce at SMC and
NRO, and we could not compare the NRO space acquisition workforce directly
to the Air Force acquisition workforce. In this regard, we were only able
to compare SMC personnel directly to Air Force acquisition personnel.
However, we were able to identify Air Force acquisition officers who work
on classified space programs and, using them as a proxy for the NRO space
acquisition workforce, we compared this group to Air Force acquisition
personnel. Additionally, we noted the actions that DOD and the Air Force
had taken to manage their workforces using a strategic workforce
management approach, but we did not evaluate the sufficiency of the
actions they took.

We conducted our review from October 2005 through June 2006 in accordance
with generally accepted government auditing standards. More detailed
information on our scope and methodology is provided in appendix I.

                                Results in Brief

While DOD and the Air Force have not achieved consensus about whether the
space acquisition workforce should have a designated career field or a
separate workforce strategy, the Air Force is responsible for
strategically managing this segment of its workforce just as it is for
other workforce groups, such as pilots and navigators.14 The Air Force has
taken actions to strategically manage the acquisition workforce and the
space cadre separately, including defining critical skill sets and
designating training for the space and acquisition workforces, and it has
done needs assessments on certain segments of its space workforce.
However, the Air Force has not done and does not plan to do an integrated,
zero-based needs assessment of its space acquisition workforce, including
military personnel, civilians, and contractors for both classified and
unclassified space programs. Such a strategic needs assessment would help
inform the Air Force's planned force reduction, which is projected to
result in a decrease of 40,000 active duty positions and a 25 percent
reduction in contractor support over the next 5 years. A zero-based needs
assessment enables an organization to identify whether skill and
competency gaps exist between current and future workforces needed to meet
program goals. It is unclear to what extent needs assessments will be
incorporated into the Air Force's force reduction planning process.
Without performing an integrated and zero-based space acquisition
workforce needs assessment and using the results to inform its force
reduction planning, the Air Force may not be able to manage the impact of
its force reduction on the space acquisition workforce or take actions to
mitigate the impact to ensure it has the quantity and quality of space
acquisition personnel needed to accomplish its space mission.

In the absence of an integrated, zero-based needs assessment of its space
acquisition workforce and a career field specialty, the Air Force cannot
ensure that it has enough space acquisition personnel or personnel who are
technically proficient to meet national security space needs. According to
the directive establishing the DOD Executive Agent for Space, the services
are responsible for developing and maintaining sufficient numbers of space
personnel to support space planning, programming, acquisitions, and
operations. According to Air Force totals of authorized and assigned
acquisition personnel, which include space acquisition personnel, the Air
Force is experiencing a shortage of midgrade and senior officers15 who
perform space acquisition, and contractor support is filling these
shortages. Midgrade and senior officers provide experience and play vital
management and oversight roles, including as acquisition program managers.
At SMC, 37 percent of the senior officer positions in engineering and
program management were vacant as of April 2006, and more than 50 percent
of the center's workload is being performed by contractors. At NRO, this
shortage of midgrade and senior officers may ultimately lead to increased
reliance on contractors, since NRO depends on Air Force personnel to fill
many of its space acquisition positions. As of March 2006, we determined
that approximately 57 percent of NRO employees were Air Force personnel.
The shortages in midgrade and senior positions are due, in part, to the
overall post-Cold War drawdown of military personnel, including space
acquisition personnel,16 and to the limited opportunities available for
senior officers in the technical acquisition career fields. The Air Force
has recognized the existence of these shortages and has begun considering
ways to address them, such as potentially identifying and moving
acquisition officers who are in nonacquisition positions to space
acquisition positions. However, the Air Force has not yet addressed the
shortages because it is trying to balance overall shortages in multiple
career fields, of which acquisition is not perceived as the most
important. For example, according to Air Force officials, space
acquisition workforce shortages have to compete for resources with demands
in other career fields, such as pilots and navigators. Continuing
shortages of these personnel may hamper SMC's and NRO's ability to meet
mission needs and highlight the need for the Air Force to strategically
manage its space acquisition workforce.

14 Examples of other workforce groups include personnel in specific career
fields, such as pilots or intelligence personnel, and a designated
grouping of several career fields, such as the space cadre, which
comprises personnel from several Air Force career fields.

Furthermore, the technical proficiency of space acquisition personnel who
are available to the Air Force may not be adequate to meet national
security space needs. Title 10 of the United States Code contains a
provision to ensure that space personnel are adequately qualified to meet
mission needs, requiring the Secretary of the Air Force to develop a
career field for officers with technical competence in space-related
matters, including the capability to develop space systems.17 At SMC, 61
percent of the officers had the lowest space acquisition certification
level, and 23 percent had no certification. In addition, the percentage of
SMC officers with the highest acquisition certifications has dropped from
28 percent in 1996 to 15 percent in 2005. The levels of space and
acquisition certification levels can be attributed to several factors.
First, for SMC, the lower levels of acquisition and space certifications
may have occurred because NRO has received priority in selecting space
acquisition personnel with higher qualifications, according to DOD and NRO
officials. In June 2006, the Air Force and NRO agreed to address a number
of workforce issues, but it is not clear how this will affect staffing
between SMC and NRO. Second, the Air Force has not institutionalized a
means of identifying the space acquisition specialty within any of its
existing career fields. Doing so could provide standardized education and
training requirements specific to space acquisition for all personnel
involved in managing space acquisition programs, and it could help to
develop personnel with the technical expertise to effectively oversee the
acquisition of space systems. Third, training that focuses on space
acquisition is limited. For example, the Defense Acquisition University
(DAU) does not incorporate space-specific training into its required
curricula for the acquisition workforce, and the Air Force's National
Security Space Institute offers only limited acquisition content in its
curricula for the space workforce. Without increased space and
acquisition-related training and a career field or specialty that
addresses standardized education and training requirements specific to
space acquisition, the Air Force may lack visibility over the capabilities
and career paths of its space acquisition personnel, and therefore may not
have the ability to ensure that space acquisition personnel can
effectively supervise and oversee the development of new space systems.
Lastly, the percentage of new acquisition managers coming into the Air
Force with technical degrees has declined over the past 15 years, from 68
percent in 1990 to 16 percent in 2005. The decline in acquisition managers
with technical degrees, coupled with the factors listed above, may
undermine the Air Force's ability to strategically manage its space
acquisition workforce and meet national security space mission needs.

15 We define midgrade officers as those officers who have served 9 to 15
years of an average 20-year career, which can encompass the ranks of
captain and major. We define senior officers as those who have served 16
or more years of an average 20-year career, which can encompass the ranks
of lieutenant colonel and above.

16 We also wanted to determine if the shortages were caused by engineers
being assigned to other career fields. However, we found that the Air
Force is predominantly using the engineers it has to fill general
acquisition-related positions. Specifically, we found that from 1994 to
2005, the Air Force placed approximately 84 percent of its engineers in
acquisition-related positions. In addition, we note that Title 10 requires
that there be a balance between the need for military personnel to serve
in career broadening positions and the need for them to serve in positions
for a sufficient length of time. 10 U.S.C. S: 1722 (f)(2).

We are making recommendations to the Air Force to take actions to promote
better management of its limited pool of space acquisition personnel. In
commenting on a draft of this report, DOD concurred or partially concurred
with these recommendations. NRO provided comments but did not formally
agree or disagree with our recommendations.

17 10 U.S.C. S: 8084.

                                   Background

Congress and DOD have become increasingly concerned about significant cost
increases and program delays for space acquisition programs. Moreover, the
skilled and technical workforce needed to manage space programs may not be
sustained at a rate necessary to meet national security needs. We have
previously reported on space acquisition performance and space cadre
workforce issues and have made recommendations to improve both the
acquisition performance of space programs and the workforce, over 90
percent of which resides in the Air Force.

Acquisition Workforce Management Concerns

Over the past decade, Congress and DOD officials have expressed concerns
about the performance of acquisition programs, including space acquisition
programs, since the programs have consistently experienced significant
cost growth and schedule delays. These concerns led to the commissioning
of numerous studies, many of which highlighted systemic issues with the
acquisition workforce, including the space acquisition workforce, as
contributing to program difficulties. Two of the most recent studies are
reports by the Defense Science Board and the Defense Acquisition
Performance Assessment Project.

In May 2003, a joint task force of the Defense Science Board issued a
report on the acquisition of national security space programs, known as
the Young Panel report.18 The task force had been chartered by senior
Office of the Secretary of Defense and Air Force officials, including the
Under Secretary of the Air Force who was also serving as the Director of
NRO, in order to determine underlying causes and systemic issues related
to significant problems in many critical national security space programs.
The members of the task force noted that one systemic issue is that there
is an overall underappreciation of the importance of appropriately staffed
and trained system engineering staffs to manage the technologically
demanding and unique aspects of space programs. In July 2004, the task
force followed up on the progress made in implementing the Young Panel
report recommendations. Although the task force noted in this follow-up
report that the establishment of the space cadre was a very positive step,
it maintained that the distinctiveness of a space acquisition professional
should be recognized with a special identifier.

18 Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology,
and Logistics, Report of the Defense Science Board/Air Force Scientific
Advisory Board Joint Task Force on Acquisition of National Security Space
Programs (Washington, D.C.: May 2003).

Additionally, the Defense Acquisition Performance Assessment (DAPA)
Project completed an integrated acquisition assessment at the request of
the Deputy Secretary of Defense and issued its report in January 2006.19
Although this report was not limited to space acquisition programs, it
noted, among other things, that key DOD acquisition personnel,
particularly acquisition managers, do not have sufficient experience,
tenure, and training to meet current acquisition challenges and that
system engineering capability within DOD is not sufficient to meet program
needs. Consequently, the DAPA report recommended that there be an increase
in the number of federal employees focused on critical skill areas, such
as program management and system engineering, with the cost of this
increase to be offset by reductions in funding for contractor support.
Moreover, the report also recommended the establishment of consistent
training, education, certification, and qualification standards for the
entire acquisition workforce. Finally, the report noted that the aging
science and engineering workforce and declining numbers of science and
engineering graduates willing to enter either industry or government will
have a negative impact on DOD's ability to address workforce concerns.

Trends in Science and Engineering Degrees

According to the National Science Foundation (NSF), the numbers of U.S.
citizens and permanent residents earning science and engineering degrees20
at the bachelor's and doctoral levels remained constant or declined during
the 1990s. At the bachelor's level, which is the level at which officers
normally enter the Air Force, the numbers have increased since then in
some fields. At the doctoral level, from which the Air Force draws
technical experts, the U.S. citizen and permanent resident share of the
total has continued to decline. Figure 2 shows the trends in degrees by
level.

19 Defense Acquisition Performance Assessment Project, Defense Acquisition
Performance Assessment, January 2006.

20 We included degrees in the following categories, which include fields
required to enter the Air Force as a scientist or engineer: physical
sciences, mathematics and computer sciences, and engineering. We excluded
the social and life sciences from our analysis.

Figure 2: Trends in Overall Science and Engineering Degrees Awarded to
U.S. Citizens and Permanent Residents

Note: Bachelor's and master's degree data unavailable for 1999.

Among engineering graduates, the number of doctoral degrees has declined
steadily over the past decade, and the number of bachelor's and master's
degrees declined in the mid-1990s but has grown since 2002. Figure 3 shows
the trends in engineering degrees awarded to U.S. citizens and permanent
residents since 1989.

Figure 3: Engineering Degrees Awarded to U.S. Citizens and Permanent
Residents

Note: Bachelor's and master's degree data unavailable for 1999.

The number of engineering graduates, as depicted in figure 3, represents
the maximum pool from which Air Force engineering officers, civilians, and
contractors may be drawn. However, permanent residents will not
necessarily all go on to obtain citizenship, and not even all citizens
will be able to obtain the security clearances that some space-related
positions require. In addition, demand throughout DOD is high, according
to DOD officials: the department employs about 45 percent of the federal
government's approximately 200,000 scientists and engineers, including
about two-thirds of its engineers. Therefore, DOD considers the
dependability of the supply of scientists and engineers who are able to
obtain security clearances to be in question.

Air Force Role in Space Acquisition

The Air Force is DOD's primary procurer and operator of space systems that
are used by the services and others throughout DOD. These activities
primarily occur at SMC or NRO. SMC, a subordinate command of Air Force
Space Command, designs and acquires all Air Force and most DOD space
systems. As of February 2006, SMC had an authorized workforce of about
7,000 people, who are divided among eight system program offices, such as
the Space Superiority and the Global Positioning System Program Office,
and several technical, financial, and logistical support directorates.

SMC's space acquisition workforce is composed of Air Force officers and
civilians, federally funded research and development center (FFRDC)
personnel, and other contractors, each of whom plays a specific role in
the acquisition process. Officers provide overall management and military
perspective on user needs; civilians provide continuity, functional
expertise, and institutional knowledge; FFRDC personnel provide in-depth
knowledge of programs and an independent perspective; and contractors
provide systems engineering and technical assistance (SETA) as a surge
capability to meet a variety of skills shortages. In addition, enlisted
personnel fill varied support roles. Figure 4 shows the composition of the
SMC workforce. The shaded portion represents contractors, who constitute
slightly more than half of the SMC acquisition workforce.

Figure 4: Composition of the Workforce at SMC

Notes: Acquisition officers are the scientists, engineers, and acquisition
managers that we have defined as constituting the space acquisition
workforce. In addition, we included contracting and financial management
officers, whom SMC considers part of its acquisition workforce and who are
part of the broad Air Force acquisition career field.

NRO, which designs and acquires reconnaissance satellites, is a defense
agency whose director reports jointly to the Director for National
Intelligence and the Secretary of Defense. From 2001 to 2005, the Under
Secretary of the Air Force also served concurrently as the Director of
NRO.21 Similar to SMC's space acquisition workforce, the space acquisition
workforce at NRO also includes Air Force officers, enlisted personnel, and
civilians. In addition, Central Intelligence Agency employees, personnel
from the other military services, and contractors contribute personnel to
NRO. Although exact figures were not available, NRO is authorized
approximately 40 percent as many officers with acquisition specialties as
is SMC.22 Historically, the NRO space acquisition workforce has received
substantial support from both FFRDC personnel and private contractors.

21 In 2001, the positions of the Under Secretary of the Air Force and the
Director of NRO were merged, upon the recommendation of the Space
Commission. However, in July 2005, the Secretary of Defense split the
positions once again, appointing a person to serve exclusively as the
Director of NRO.

Space Acquisition Workforce Is Not Defined as a Distinct Workforce

DOD and the Air Force have not established a separate workforce for space
acquisition personnel.23 As a result, we determined that the space
acquisition workforce resides in two areas-the acquisition workforce or
the space cadre workforce. In other words, we determined that the space
acquisition workforce consists of acquisition personnel with space
experience and space cadre personnel with acquisition experience. The Air
Force acquisition workforce and the space cadre workforce have separate
management frameworks-each of which has a separate workforce strategy-that
include different certification levels tailored to each of the workforces'
needs.

The Air Force has not developed a separate workforce strategy for space
acquisition personnel because there is no consensus within DOD or the
services that space systems are inherently different from other systems,
and DOD's current position is that those involved in developing or
acquiring space assets are not different enough from other acquirers to
warrant a separate workforce strategy. The departmentwide Space
Professional Oversight Board has debated this issue, and we found
officials who agreed with both positions. Officials cite two principal
arguments in favor of the view that space is unique. First, according to
some Air Force and DOD officials, as well as a DAU briefing to the Air
Force's National Security Space Institute's (NSSI) flag-officer level
executive course, space acquisition is different because space systems are
purchased in small quantities; there are few operators, and these require
specialized training; and these systems need to be perfect the first time,
because satellites cannot be recalled for repairs. In addition, a high
proportion of total costs are devoted to system acquisition rather than
operations and support, which is different from the typical DOD life cycle
cost curve. Second, some senior Air Force and DOD officials believe that
personnel need to spend at least a decade learning about space systems
before they can become effective acquirers and that knowledge of systems
engineering is critical for space acquisition work.

22 For NRO, the authorized percentage of acquisition officers is only an
approximation because some who are coded as acquisition officers could
actually be performing non-space acquisition duties; conversely, some who
are not coded as acquisition officers could be performing space
acquisition duties. The authorized percentage cited represents our best
estimate in the absence of more detailed information from NRO.

23 The Navy and the Army also have space officers who perform acquisition
work, but Army and Navy space programs are relatively small as a
percentage of the overall DOD space program.

Officials who do not view space as inherently different cite two principal
arguments. First, each type of procurement has unique aspects-for example,
lives may be lost when prototype aircraft crash-and therefore making a
distinction between space and non-space acquisition would set a precedent
that could lead to demands for numerous separate acquisition strategies.
In addition, officials pointed out that Defense Acquisition Workforce
Improvement Act (DAWIA) requirements are structured functionally.
Personnel specialize in such areas as program management or systems
planning, research, development, and engineering, not in major systems
like satellites or aircraft. Therefore, an acquisition manager can acquire
any type of platform.

In the absence of a defined space acquisition workforce, we identified the
acquisition workforce and the space cadre and the frameworks used to
manage them. The acquisition workforce has the Acquisition Professional
Development Program (APDP), which was established to promote the
development and sustainment of a professional acquisition workforce within
the Air Force in accordance with DAWIA requirements.24 The APDP consists
of three levels of certification for the acquisition professional.
Acquisition professionals may obtain certification in one or more of
several areas, such as acquisition program management, systems
engineering, and test and evaluation. Each level of acquisition
certification requires a combination of education, experience, and
training. For example, in order to achieve the first level of
certification in the area of acquisition program management, an officer
must have 1 year of acquisition experience and attend an acquisition
management course offered by DAU.25 To achieve the second level in this
area, the officer must have 2 years of acquisition experience and have
taken additional DAU program management courses. To achieve the third
level, the officer should have taken some amount of coursework toward a
master's degree, have 4 years of acquisition experience, and take an
additional DAU program management course.

24 In 1990, Congress passed DAWIA in order to enhance the quality and
professionalism of the defense acquisition workforce (Pub. L. No.
101-510). Most of DAWIA was codified in Title 10 of the United States
Code, and it has been amended a few times since enactment. DAWIA specifies
the minimum qualification standards of those personnel performing
functions integral to the acquisition process, formalizes career paths for
personnel who wish to pursue careers in acquisition, and defines critical
or senior management acquisition positions.

25 DAU was established in 1992, in accordance with DAWIA, in order to
provide for the professional education, development, and training of the
acquisition workforce.

For the space cadre workforce, Air Force acquisition officers with space
experience are included in Air Force Space Command's space professional
development program as credentialed space professionals, also known as
space cadre members. The Space Professional Development Program includes
among its basic elements the identification of the unique space
experiences of space professionals, the tracking of these experiences in a
space professional database, and the establishment of a Space Professional
Certification Program to recognize distinct levels of space expertise. The
Space Professional Certification Program consists of three levels of
certification, each of which involves varying levels of education,
training, and experience, and emphasizes substantial space experience as
the main ingredient qualifying an individual for higher levels of
responsibility. For example, in order to achieve the first level of
certification, an officer must possess a bachelor's degree, have taken the
Space 100 course,26 and have at least 1 year of space experience. In order
to achieve the second level of certification, which is usually around the
10-year career point, an officer must additionally have taken the Space
200 course and possess at least 6 years of space experience. Finally, in
order to achieve the third and highest level of certification, which
usually takes place around the 15-year career point, an officer must have
also taken the Space 300 course and have at least 9 years of space
experience. Within the Air Force's acquisition workforce, officers in both
the scientist and engineer career fields are required to possess a degree
in a technical area that is relevant to their career field. However,
acquisition managers are not required to hold a technical degree or a
master's degree.

26 The courses known as Space 200 and Space 300 are offered by Air Force
Space Command's National Security Space Institute, which was established
in order to institute stronger, technically oriented space education and
training programs. Space 100 is offered by the Air Education and Training
Command.

 Air Force Has Done Some Space and Acquisition Workforce Planning, but Lacks an
                     Integrated Zero-Based Needs Assessment

Although the Air Force has taken some actions to address the key elements
of strategic workforce management used by leading organizations, these
actions have been targeted to either the acquisition workforce or the
space cadre-not the space acquisition workforce. More important, the Air
Force has not done a zero-based needs assessment for the space acquisition
workforce-a critical step in strategically managing a workforce.

Air Force Actions to Address the Strategic Planning Model Are Directed at the
Acquisition and Space Cadre Workforces

We found that the Air Force has taken several actions to better manage the
acquisition and the space cadre workforces, such as identifying personnel
gaps and addressing career path and training development. For example, the
Air Force Assistant Secretary for Acquisition recently conducted a
long-range review of scientific and engineering capacity within the Air
Force, and one of acquisition officer/civilian supply and shortages. The
Air Force Manpower Agency is currently conducting a servicewide
Acquisition and Sustainment Unit manpower study, and the Office of the
Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition has entered into an
agreement with the Office of Personnel Management to conduct a workforce
and succession planning study, which includes Air Force civilian personnel
with acquisition specialties.

The strategic workforce model also entails developing plans and strategies
to fill identified personnel gaps, building capabilities, and monitoring
and evaluating the progress of efforts. We found that Air Force
Headquarters has identified gaps in its acquisition workforce and
subsequently plans to allocate acquisition officers among areas of need;
however, the plan does not distinguish between space-related and other
acquisition officers. Building capabilities entails acquiring and using
flexibilities to shape the workforce. We found that the Office of the Air
Force Assistant Secretary for Acquisition regularly monitors the rates at
which authorized positions are filled, and brings acquisition personnel
shortages to the attention of higher headquarters for corrective action.

Efforts regarding Skill Sets, Training, and Career Path Development

The Air Force Space Command has addressed critical skill sets, training,
and career path development as part of its effort to develop and manage
its space cadre officers, including acquisition personnel who meet space
cadre qualifications. For example, Air Force Space Command is continuing
to conduct an analysis of the current space cadre and to identify critical
skill sets needed for each segment, including officers, enlisted
personnel, and civilians. So far, the analysis has been completed for
acquisition officers, including those who are assigned to NRO, but has not
yet been completed for civilians.

Air Force Space Command has also established a space-specific series of
training courses.27 In addition, SMC and NRO offer space
acquisition-specific curricula to newly assigned officers and civilians at
those locations. Air Force Space Command has also published its Career
Opportunities Guide that lists each space-related position, and describes
the education, experience, and training prerequisites for each to enable
officers to prepare for specific assignments.

Air Force Space Command and the Air Force's acquisition career field
manager have developed sample career paths for space cadre members and
acquisition officers, respectively, to follow. Each sample career path
provides variations that provide flexibility and emphasize different types
of assignments, depending on individual preference and service needs.

Efforts regarding Recruitment and Promotion

In terms of recruitment and promotion, the Air Force Deputy Chief of Staff
for Personnel annually sets recruitment targets as well as retention and
promotion goals for each military rank with input from each of the career
field managers. The major commands, such as Air Force Space Command, do
not set recruitment targets. Rather, acquisition officers are recruited
and promoted according to targets set for each career field and source of
commission. Individuals who may fill space acquisition positions at some
time in their careers are normally recruited into space operations or one
of the acquisition career fields, but officers from a wider range of
career fields, including pilots, may also fill acquisition positions.
Civilian recruitment is managed at the major command level. Air Force
Space Command, and subordinate commands such as SMC, may hire civilian
personnel up to the command's budget ceiling. Different major commands can
therefore tailor the civilian proportion of the workforce to their
particular needs.

27 The series consists of three courses, which are designed to be
completed in approximately the 1st, 9th, and 15th year of service,
respectively. The latter two courses are managed by NSSI, and are meant
eventually to be given to all space cadre members at the appropriate point
in their careers.

The Air Force Does Not Have an Integrated Zero-Based Needs Assessment for the
Space Acquisition Workforce

The Air Force has not performed an integrated zero-based needs assessment
for the entire space acquisition workforce. It has performed or will
perform such assessments for components of the space acquisition
workforce. For example, the Air Force has done an assessment of the
personnel working on classified space systems that recommended a 27
percent reduction in positions allotted to NRO. In addition, at the time
of our review, the Air Force was conducting an assessment that included
personnel working on unclassified systems; however, the Air Force has not
conducted an integrated needs assessment of its entire space acquisition
workforce, to include all segments of the workforce-military, civilian and
contractor personnel-and those who work on both classified and
unclassified space systems. In May 2005, the Air Force completed a
separate zero-based needs assessment that included those Air Force
personnel who were assigned to classified programs. This assessment
included all Air Force personnel who are assigned to classified positions,
not only those space acquisition personnel working on classified space
systems. According to Air Force officials, the purpose of the ongoing
assessment of personnel working on unclassified space systems is to
establish an approved method of distributing all acquisition personnel,
including space acquisition personnel, among the various acquisition
organizations in order to ensure that each organization has the right
number of personnel with the right skill sets to meet its mission goals.
Although Air Force officials told us that this assessment includes
military, civilian, and contractor personnel, they noted that it does not
include the portion of the space acquisition workforce that works on
classified space systems.

The Air Force is entering a 5-year period that will see a projected
decrease of 40,000 active duty positions and a 25 percent reduction in
both the SETA and the FFRDC contractor workforces. It is unclear to what
extent the two completed and ongoing needs assessments will be
incorporated into the service's force reduction planning and process
improvement efforts. Also, the Air Force cannot draw on overall DOD
guidance: the recently published acquisition workforce strategic plan
lacked information on the space workforce. The absence of such a
fact-based gap analysis can undermine an organization's efforts to
identify and respond to current and emerging challenges. For example,
without such an analysis, the Air Force may find itself with a workforce
that does not have the education, experience, or expertise needed when
program goals change. Additionally, without incorporating an integrated
space acquisition workforce needs assessment into its force reduction
planning, or reducing the number of space acquisition programs, the Air
Force may find it difficult to determine the impact of its force
reductions on the quantity and quality of its space acquisition personnel
and to formulate actions to mitigate the reductions.

Air Force May Not Have Enough Space Acquisition Personnel to Meet National
                              Security Space Needs

In the absence of an integrated, zero-based needs assessment of its space
acquisition workforce, the Air Force cannot ensure that it has enough
space acquisition personnel to meet national security space needs given
its current number of space acquisition programs. The Air Force is
experiencing a shortage of midgrade and senior officers-specifically,
captains, majors, and lieutenant colonels-who perform space acquisition
work, and contractor support is filling this shortage. The Air Force has
recognized the existence of this shortage and has begun considering ways
to address it, but it has not yet addressed it.

Air Force May Not Have Sufficient Numbers of Mid- and Senior-Grade Space
Acquisition Personnel

Determining sufficient numbers of qualified personnel for current and
future needs is a key function of workforce planning. The DOD directive
that established the Executive Agent for Space charges the military
services with developing and maintaining a sufficient number of
space-qualified personnel to support space planning, programming,
acquisitions, and operations. The Air Force is experiencing a shortage of
mid- and senior-grade officers in the engineering and acquisition manager
career fields, according to Air Force totals of authorized and assigned
acquisition personnel, which include space acquisition personnel.28 The
shortages of these officers within the space acquisition workforce may
hamper the Air Force's ability to meet national security space needs.
Specifically, the engineering career field is experiencing a shortage from
captain to colonel, and the acquisition manager career field is
experiencing a shortage from major to colonel. For example, in fiscal year
2006, the Air Force authorized that 48 percent of its officers, or 1,285
total, in the engineering workforce should be the rank of captain, but
currently only 29 percent, or 767, are captains. Additionally, while 21
percent should be the rank of major, only 15 percent are currently majors.
Similarly, the Air Force has authorized 28 percent of acquisition managers
(713 total) to be majors and 25 percent (639 total) to be lieutenant
colonels, but these ranks are currently 18 percent (472) of the total and
20 percent (511 total), respectively. Despite this shortage, the Air Force
currently has more scientists and acquisition managers assigned than
authorized. This is because there is a surplus of junior officers in these
acquisition career fields. For example, in fiscal year 2006, the Air Force
authorized 20 percent of engineers, or 535 total, to be the rank of
lieutenant, but currently 46 percent of engineers, or 1,205 total, are
lieutenants. Similarly, the Air Force authorized 10 percent of acquisition
managers, or 254 total, to be the rank of lieutenant, but currently 26
percent of acquisition managers, or 686 total, are lieutenants.
Acquisition managers play an important role in managing space programs,
and the surplus of lieutenants, or junior officers, as acquisition
managers may hamper the Air Force's ability to meet program needs. For an
example, see figure 5, which shows the authorized and assigned totals by
rank for the acquisition manager career field. In addition, Air Force
officials told us that there are other career fields within the service
that are also experiencing shortages.

28 Authorization refers to the number of positions that the Air Force has
determined it will fund in a given fiscal year. Assignment refers to the
number of personnel that the Air Force has placed in those funded
positions.

Figure 5: Fiscal Year 2006 Authorized and Assigned Totals for Air Force
Acquisition Managers by Rank

Based on our analysis, there are similar shortages of majors and
lieutenant colonels at SMC. As of February 2006, SMC's authorized
positions for majors and lieutenant colonels were both filled at 63
percent, which is equivalent to 111 majors and 68 lieutenant colonels. In
contrast, SMC's positions for lieutenants were filled at 302 percent of
their authorized numbers; although 116 lieutenants were authorized, there
were 350 lieutenants assigned to SMC. Several officials from the Office of
the Secretary of the Air Force and SMC told us that SMC is staffed with
much higher percentages of such junior officers than of midgrade and
senior officers as part of Air Force's attempt to address SMC shortages.
Additionally, 37 percent of SMC's senior management acquisition positions
for military personnel performing systems engineering or program
management functions-positions requiring a rank of lieutenant colonel or
higher-were vacant as of February 2006. SMC officials have consistently
expressed concern that the shortage of acquisition personnel with the
right experience and knowledge-such as those eligible to fill senior
management acquisition positions-will make it difficult to properly manage
space system acquisition programs.

We also observed that, without considering actual fill rates, SMC was
authorized to receive a greater percentage of junior officers in the
acquisition career fields than were authorized for the balance of the Air
Force in fiscal year 2006. For example, in the acquisition manager career
field, SMC was authorized to have about 14 percent lieutenants and 38
percent captains, whereas the comparable acquisition manager
authorizations for the balance of the Air Force were 9 percent lieutenants
and 29 percent captains. Correspondingly, SMC was authorized to receive a
lower percentage of senior officers than was the rest of the Air Force,
with SMC authorized to have 7 percent of its engineers be at the rank of
lieutenant colonel, compared to the Air Force authorization that 10
percent of engineers be at this rank. In the scientist career field, SMC
is authorized zero lieutenant colonels and zero colonels, with the
remaining Air Force authorization being 93 lieutenant colonels and 20
colonels. In the engineer career field, SMC is authorized to have 23
lieutenant colonels and 5 colonels, with the remaining Air Force
authorization being 230 lieutenant colonels and 33 colonels. Having a
lower number of senior officers authorized for SMC may create a risk of
hampering SMC's ability to carry out its mission, especially compared to
locations that are receiving a higher rate of senior officers. According
to a former Commander of Air Force Space Command, the continuing shortage
of experienced space acquisition personnel assigned to SMC is one of the
command's most urgent problems. See figure 6 for more detail on the
authorizations by rank for acquisition personnel at SMC and within the Air
Force as a whole.

Figure 6: Fiscal Year 2006 Authorizations for Acquisition Personnel by
Rank at SMC and for the Air Force Overall

SMC is using contractor support to fill the shortages of midgrade and
senior officers in the engineering and acquisition manager career fields.
This contractor support includes both personnel from FFRDCs as well as
contractors from private companies who provide SETA support. As of April
2006, contractors were performing approximately 50 percent of SMC's
workload. In addition, SMC employs about 1,300 civilians, about half of
whom work in technical and financial acquisition positions. Civilian
acquisition positions in program offices were filled at a rate of 96
percent as of April 2006. According to SMC officials, civilians provide
functional expertise and continuity, and SMC is pursuing initiatives to
increase its civilian positions in order to counter the shortage of
military space acquisition personnel. However, SMC was experiencing a 26
percent vacancy rate in its civilian acquisition positions for systems
engineering and program management as of April 2006, and SMC officials
related that approximately 40 percent of its civilian workforce will be
eligible for retirement by 2007. We were not able to make a comparison to
NRO because of lack of information from NRO. However, NRO depends on Air
Force personnel to fill many of its space acquisition positions, with
approximately 57 percent of NRO employees being Air Force personnel as of
March 2006. The shortage of midgrade and senior officers in the Air Force
may ultimately lead NRO to increase its contractor support. In general,
the vacancy rates at SMC for both senior military and civilian management
acquisition positions and the high percentage of the civilian workforce
that is eligible for retirement in a few years are factors that may affect
SMC's ability to carry out its mission.

The Air Force has recognized the existence of this shortage and has
recently begun considering potential ways to address it. For example,
during a March 2006 conference, Air Force officials discussed potential
near-term solutions to acquisition personnel shortages, such as tapping
available resources to the maximum extent practicable to fill acquisition
positions. This near-term solution would involve utilizing acquisition
officers who currently serve in nonacquisition positions, such as
instructor positions, as well as officers with nonacquisition specialties,
particularly if they have technical degrees or space experience. Air Force
officials also discussed mid- and longer-term solutions, such as
reevaluating the nonrated prioritization plan for acquisition personnel,
streamlining the civilian hiring process, and defining future acquisition
manpower requirements. It is unclear what actions will stem from these
discussions. If actions are not taken to address the shortage of midgrade
and senior acquisition officers, the Air Force may be facing substantial
risk, as the shortage may affect the Air Force's ability to strategically
manage its workforce to ensure that national security space needs are met.

Shortages Are Due to 1990s Reductions in Acquisition Personnel and Other Factors

There are several reasons for the Air Force's shortage of midgrade and
senior officers in the engineering and acquisition manager career fields.
First, the shortage is due, in part, to the drawdown of acquisition
personnel in the 1990s and the effects of DOD's subsequent acquisition
reform. Following the end of the Cold War, there was a decline in the
national security space budget and a corresponding decrease in the number
of acquisition personnel available to perform space acquisition work. For
example, DOD reduced the size of its acquisition workforce in the 1990s,
beginning in fiscal year 1996 when Congress directed the services to
reduce the workforce by 15,000 within a year and by 25 percent over the
following 5 years. This decrease in acquisition personnel means that today
there are fewer officers, particularly majors and lieutenant colonels, to
perform acquisition work. This is consistent with the Air Force's
workforce model, which shows that it takes an average of 11 and 16 years,
respectively, to reach the ranks of major and lieutenant colonel.

The decrease in midgrade and senior space acquisition officers is also
consistent with the emphasis on breadth in the acquisition career field.
Scientists and engineers have three defined career paths: technical
expert, manager/leader, and senior leader. Those who embark on the
technical expert path, and continue to pursue technical depth beyond the
senior captain level, can generally expect to retire as majors or
lieutenant colonels. The acquisition manager timeline also concentrates
system program office assignments early in a career and emphasizes staff
assignments for majors and lieutenant colonels. By contrast, the space
professional career guide emphasizes depth of experience; therefore, an
acquisition officer who is also a member of the space cadre may experience
difficulty in balancing both sets of expectations.

The 1990s drawdown of the acquisition workforce, including the space
acquisition workforce, had the effect of increasing DOD's reliance on
contractor support to perform space acquisition work. We have previously
reported that in the 1990s, DOD structured contracts for acquisition
programs, including space acquisition programs, in a way that reduced
oversight and shifted key decision-making responsibility onto
contractors.29 For example, in 1994, the Secretary of Defense directed
that acquisition programs, including space acquisition programs, decrease
reliance on military specifications and standards and encouraged
contractors to propose nongovernment standards and industrywide standards
instead. DOD officials told us that the workforce reductions of the 1990s,
coupled with this decision to grant substantial control over
specifications and standards to contractors, led to poor management of
acquisition programs, including space acquisition programs, especially
with regard to testing, process, quality control, and subcontractor
oversight. As a result, these officials believe that current space
acquisition programs have many undetected problems that could lead to
cost, performance, and schedule problems upon discovery.

29 GAO, Space Acquisitions: Improvements Needed in Space Systems
Acquisitions and Keys to Achieving Them, GAO-06-626T (Washington, D.C.:
Apr. 6, 2006).

In addition, there have been consolidations within the defense supplier
base for space programs. Since 1985, there were at least 10 fully
competent prime contractors competing for the large programs and a number
that could compete for subcontracts. Arguably today, there are only two
contractors that could handle DOD's most complex space programs. We
observed that SMC's Technical Acquisition Support Services contractor
firms include the major satellite-building prime contractor firms, as well
as some firms that are owned by or have other relationships with these
prime contractors. This interrelationship has caused both the House
Committee on Armed Services30 and space acquisition organization leaders
to express concern about the potential for conflict of interest and the
outsourcing of inherently governmental functions. SMC officials observed
that they lack visibility over the work of subcontractors, which can lead
to technical problems that cause cost overruns or schedule delays. While
SMC has calculated that contractors carry out approximately 50 percent of
the organization's workload, NRO does not have a standard method to count
its contractors. The DOD Inspector General recently reported that although
DOD is not required to report the number of contractors, omitting
contractors from the workforce count results in the invisibility of a
large part of the true acquisition workforce.31 This lack of visibility,
over what could be a substantial percentage of the workforce, also makes
it difficult to determine workforce gaps in critical skills and to take
corrective actions.

Another reason for the shortage of midgrade and senior officers in the
engineering and acquisition manager career fields that constitute the
space acquisition workforce is that the Air Force is trying to balance
overall shortages in multiple career fields, not only in the acquisition
career fields. Although it has recognized the existence of this shortage,
the Air Force considers the needs of all career fields with respect to
mission, people, and available resources when directing personnel actions.
However, the acquisition career fields are not perceived as the most
important of the career fields within the Air Force, which generally
places greater emphasis on recruiting and retaining personnel in the pilot
career field. Thus, space acquisition workforce shortages have to compete
for resources with demands for pilots and navigators. According to Air
Force personnel data, pilots entering the Air Force in fiscal year 2007
will increase as a percentage of total Air Force personnel over the course
of the next 30 years whereas engineers decrease as a percentage over the
same time period. For example, pilots entering the Air Force in fiscal
year 2007 will make up 19 percent of total Air Force officers, with these
pilots at the end of this period constituting about 27 percent of total
Air Force officers. However, engineers will enter the Air Force in fiscal
year 2007 constituting 7 percent of total Air Force officers and, in 30
years, they will constitute only 2 percent. The lack of emphasis on the
acquisition career path and the small percentage of Air Force engineers
may affect the Air Force's ability to strategically manage its workforce
and ensure adequate staffing of its program offices.

30 H.R. Rep. No. 109-452, at 350 (2006).

31 Department of Defense, Office of the Inspector General, Human Capital:
Report on the DOD Acquisition Workforce Count, D-2006-073 (Washington,
D.C.: Apr. 17, 2006).

Finally, the Air Force has not addressed the shortage of midgrade and
senior space acquisition officers because it is currently concentrating on
Air Force overall force reduction planning and process improvement
efforts. The Air Force is entering a 5-year period that will see a
projected decrease of 40,000 active duty positions and a 25 percent
reduction in both the SETA and the FFRDC contractor workforces. In the
face of these reductions, the Air Force has also begun an effort that
focuses on the identification and elimination of activities, actions, and
policies that do not contribute to its efficient and effective operation.
At the time of our review, Air Force officials told us they did not know
what impact these force reduction and process improvement efforts would
have on the Air Force space acquisition workforce.

    Air Force's Existing Space Acquisition Personnel May Not Be Technically
        Proficient in Ways Needed to Meet National Security Space Needs

The technical proficiency of the current space acquisition workforce that
is available to the Air Force may not be adequate to meet national
security space needs. Although Title 10 of the United States Code requires
the Air Force to develop a career field for officers with technical
competence in space-related matters, including the capability to develop
space systems,32 there are no specific technical requirements for the
space acquisition workforce. However, there are certification programs for
the acquisition and space cadre workforces, the two workforces we have
identified as including members of the space acquisition workforce. These
certification programs are the APDP and the Space Professional
Certification Program. Based on our analysis, the space acquisition
workforce at SMC had fewer of the higher certification levels in both
certification programs. Because of the unavailability of NRO data, we were
generally only able to examine the certification levels for SMC staff. For
example, SMC's percentage of personnel with the highest level of
acquisition professional certification has steadily dropped in the last
few years while those at the lowest level of certification have steadily
increased. Several factors contribute to these differences.

SMC Acquisition Officers Have Fewer Higher Certification Levels

Our analysis showed that SMC acquisition officers have fewer acquisition
certifications at the higher levels than do Air Force acquisition officers
overall. The Air Force APDP requires a combination of education,
coursework, and experience to attain any of three levels of certification,
with the first level being for junior acquisition personnel; the second
level for midgrade acquisition personnel; and the third level for senior
acquisition personnel, such as lieutenant colonels and above.

For SMC only, while the percentage of APDP level 1 personnel is higher in
2005 than in 1996, the percentage of APDP level 3 personnel-the highest
certification level-has gone down, as shown in figure 7.33

32 10 U.S.C. S: 8084.

33 Percentages were determined by dividing the total for each level by the
overall total for that year.

Figure 7: Acquisition Certification Levels at SMC, 1996-2005

Certification at the third level is required for officers to serve in
senior management acquisition positions, which are acquisition positions
designated by the Secretary of Defense that carry significant
responsibility. Specifically, the number of acquisition officers at SMC
certified at the highest level was about 28 percent in 1996 and in 2005
was 15 percent. As previously mentioned, approximately 37 percent of SMC's
senior management acquisition positions for military personnel performing
systems engineering or program management functions were vacant as of
April 2006. One reason for the drop in highly certified acquisition
officers may be the Air Force's lack of emphasis on the acquisition career
path. For example, officials from the Office of the Secretary of the Air
Force and SMC told us that scientists and engineers may choose to leave
the Air Force before reaching higher certification levels because of the
lack of promotion opportunities and the lure of higher wages in the
private sector, a view which was echoed in a discussion we held with about
a dozen SMC junior officers. Moreover, according to an official from the
Office of the Secretary of the Air Force, the drop in the number of highly
certified acquisition officers may also be explained by a change in Air
Force philosophy about promotions, in which information regarding an
individual's advanced degree was masked from promotion boards in favor of
a focus on the individual's operational or warfighting experience.
Acquisition personnel, who generally do not deploy and are therefore less
likely to have operational or warfighting experience, may have seen this
change concerning promotions as career limiting and left the Air Force.
The Secretary of the Air Force recently decided that beginning with
calendar year 2008 promotion boards, information on all degrees earned by
an individual will once again be made available to the board. The steadily
rising percentage of certification level 1 personnel since 2001 may be
explained by the large number of junior officers at SMC but may bode well
for future higher certification levels over the next decade and beyond.
However, the continued lack of promotion opportunities for those in the
acquisition workforce, including those in the space acquisition workforce,
may not allow the Air Force to build on the rising certification levels in
the future.

Acquisition officers at SMC generally had fewer of the acquisition
certifications at the higher levels compared to acquisition officers for
the Air Force as a whole. Figure 8 shows these comparisons.

Figure 8: Acquisition Certification Levels for Acquisition Officers at SMC
and the Air Force

Note: Numbers for each group may add up to more than 100 percent because
acquisition officers can have certification levels in more than one
acquisition category.

For the space certification levels at SMC, we found that in spring 2006,
61 percent of the workforce had certification for level 1 of the space
professional certification program-the lowest level of the program-and 23
percent of the workforce had no certification. As noted in the previous
section, these percentages more than likely reflect the relatively large
percentage of the SMC workforce made up of junior officers and the
relatively small percentage made up of senior officers. Figure 9 reflects
the breakout of the space professional certifications at the three levels
at SMC during our review.

Figure 9: Space Professional Certification Levels for SMC Space
Acquisition Workforce

Notes: The no certification or level 0 category includes individuals who
have not yet attained level 1, who are not currently considered
credentialed space professionals, or both. We found only one case in which
a level 1 officer was not concurrently a credentialed space professional.

Differences in SMC Space Acquisition Personnel and Personnel Working in
Classified Space Programs

Our analysis showed that the acquisition officers at SMC also possess
fewer of the acquisition and space professional certifications at the
higher levels than those serving in classified space positions.34
Specifically, for the acquisition certification levels, we found that as
of April 2006, a greater percentage of SMC acquisition officers had the
lowest certification level than did the acquisition officers serving in
classified space positions. Conversely, a higher percentage of acquisition
officers working in classified space programs had certifications at levels
2 and 3. Figure 10 depicts these comparisons.

34 NRO declined to provide us a detailed breakout of all of its personnel.
Therefore, we could not directly compare SMC personnel working on
unclassified space programs to NRO personnel working on classified space
programs. Using Air Force personnel data, we were able to identify and
compare SMC personnel in unclassified programs to some personnel working
on classified space programs at other organizations, including NRO.

Figure 10: Acquisition Certification Levels for Classified and SMC Space
Acquisition Workforces

Notes: Numbers for each group may add up to more than 100 percent because
acquisition officers can have certification levels in more than one
acquisition category.

Similarly, our analysis showed that those working on classified programs
have a greater percentage of the higher levels of space certification
compared to the SMC workforce. We believe this may be a reflection of the
Air Force's decision to place more senior officers at NRO as well as a
reflection of the perceived risk level of classified programs and the need
to place more experienced personnel on these programs. Figure 11 shows the
comparison of space certification levels for personnel working on
classified space programs and at SMC.

Figure 11: Space Certification Levels for Classified and SMC Space
Acquisition Workforces

Note: The no certification or level 0 category includes individuals who
have not yet attained Level 1, who are not currently considered
credentialed space professionals, or both.

Additionally, our analysis showed that acquisition officers working in
classified space programs have more education and space and acquisition
experience than do their counterparts in unclassified space programs.
Specifically, of the acquisition officers who are currently serving in
classified space positions, about 40 percent have technical master's
degrees or higher, whereas 16 percent of those serving in unclassified
space positions do. The comparable figures for technical bachelor's
degrees were 83 and 60 percent, respectively.

In general, SMC's acquisition managers had less depth and breadth of
experience than their classified counterparts. Acquisition managers
constituted a higher share of entry-level positions at SMC, and a smaller
share of the most senior positions, than either their classified
counterparts or those in the Air Force as a whole. Moreover, acquisition
managers are encouraged to already have experience in a different
specialty, preferably at the beginning of their careers.35 However, only a
little more than half of acquisition managers at SMC had prior experience
in a different specialty, whereas most acquisition managers in classified
space programs had such experience. Of the 180 acquisition managers we
identified as assigned to a classified space program in February 2006, 80
percent had had one or more prior assignments in another field, and more
than half of these were in scientific or engineering specialties. Several
DOD officials, along with officers from the Navy as well as the Air Force,
expressed the opinion that acquisition management skills are broadly
transferable for any type of program; therefore, space acquisition
managers do not need a distinct academic background or type of experience.
Yet the classified acquisition managers are more likely to have technical
degrees and higher certification levels, reflecting more education,
training, and experience than their SMC peers-creating, in effect, a
specialty for some but not all acquisition managers.

Lower Levels of Education and Experience in Space Acquisition Workforce Are
Attributable to Several Factors

The lower levels of technical education and certification in the Air Force
space acquisition workforce are due to several factors. First, the lower
levels of certification and experience among acquisition officers at SMC
have occurred because NRO has received priority in selecting space
acquisition personnel with higher qualifications, based on a historical
agreement between the Secretary of Defense and the Director of Central
Intelligence, as well as on the Air Force's prioritization plan for
acquisition officers. Second, the Air Force has not institutionalized a
means of identifying the space acquisition specialty within any of its
existing career fields. At a minimum, identifying space acquisition as a
specialty within the acquisition career field could allow the Air Force to
identify personnel and provide standardized training in space acquisition.
Finally, training that focuses on space acquisition is limited. Without
increased space- and acquisition-related training and a career field or
specialty within a career field that addresses standardized education and
training requirements specific to space acquisition, the Air Force may not
have the visibility it needs over its space acquisition personnel in order
to strategically manage the workforce and to ensure that these personnel
can effectively supervise and oversee the development of new space
systems. These issues are compounded by the decline of acquisition
managers entering SMC with technical degrees.

35 Officer Classification, Air Force Manual 36-2105, October 31, 2004,
Attachment 43.

  NRO Priority in Selecting Qualified Space Acquisition Personnel

We believe that the shortage of qualified space acquisition personnel with
a technical education has occurred at SMC in part because NRO receives
priority in selecting space acquisition personnel with higher
certification levels. This priority is founded upon a provision of a 1965
agreement between the Secretary of Defense and the Director of Central
Intelligence, which states that NRO is to receive the best talent
appropriately available from the military services and other agencies. In
addition, NRO currently receives priority fill status in the Air Force
nonrated prioritization plan, while Air Force Space Command, which
includes SMC, receives only entitlement fill status.36 As previously
mentioned, this prioritization plan serves the purpose of allocating
scarce numbers of acquisition officers among the various requirements, in
an effort to ensure that the most critical requirements are filled and
that when necessary, vacancies occur in the lowest priority organizations.
At present, staff organizations such as Air Force Headquarters have the
highest priority, with NRO occupying the next highest priority. The major
commands, such as Air Force Space Command, have the lowest priority
according to the prioritization plan. This means that NRO can choose the
better qualified personnel to fill its space acquisition positions before
SMC does. Moreover, officials from NRO and the Office of the Secretary of
the Air Force told us that NRO has historically been accorded this
staffing priority over other Air Force locations competing for the same
acquisition personnel. In addition, NRO has entry-level requirements for
its space acquisition positions that are higher than the Air Force
entry-level requirements established by the APDP.

This prioritization plan is currently under review. During the course of
our review, SMC and Air Force Space Command leadership requested that the
Deputy Air Force Chief of Staff for Personnel reconsider the
prioritization plan because of SMC's shortage of senior acquisition
personnel. Specifically, they asked that SMC receive the same status under
the prioritization plan as NRO; this means having must fill or priority
fill status instead of its current entitlement status. Following the
February 2006 Air Force staffing conference, the Office of the Assistant
Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition agreed to review the
prioritization plan. In June 2006, the Air Force Chief of Staff and the
Director of NRO signed a joint statement of intent aimed at enhancing Air
Force-NRO relations, space capabilities, and mission performance. Among
other things, this statement of intent calls for the establishment of a
Space Assignment Advisory Board to oversee the assignments of Air Force
space professionals, including those assigned to NRO. According to the
statement, this board offers the potential to provide a proper balance of
Air Force professional manning and experience levels between SMC and NRO,
but it does not specify that this involves any change to SMC's or NRO's
status under the prioritization plan. Additional workforce issues may be
addressed in future agreements.

36 Manpower positions are prioritized into three categories: Must Fill,
Priority Fill, and Entitlement Fill. The fill rate for the must fill
category is 100 percent. The manning percentage for priority fill is
normally 85 percent. The entitlement fill rate is a function of the
remaining available resources once the must fill and priority fill rate
positions are appropriately filled.

However, as previously mentioned, the Air Force has not conducted an
integrated zero-based needs assessment for the space acquisition
workforce, as called for by the strategic workforce planning model that is
used by leading private and public sector organizations. Conducting such
an assessment would help the Air Force to ensure proper staffing of all
space acquisition positions, such as those at NRO and SMC, because it
involves identification of gaps that exist between the current and future
workforces needed to meet program goals.

  Lack of a Designated Career Field

Although the Secretary of the Air Force is required to develop a career
field for officers to ensure that they have the technical competence to
develop space systems, there is currently no single space acquisition
career field or specialty. Title 10 of the United States Code contains a
provision requiring the Air Force to develop a career field for officers
with technical competence in space-related matters, including the
capability to develop space systems.37 We believe that the capability to
develop space systems includes the capability to acquire them. The law
also requires technical competence in operating space systems and in
developing space doctrine and concepts of space operation, both of which
are encompassed in the training required by the Air Force's space
operations career field. However, the space operations career field does
not include space acquisition personnel, and there is no corresponding
career field or specialty to develop technical competence in space
acquisition. Moreover, of the acquisition career fields that encompass the
space acquisition workforce, scientists and engineers are required to
possess a degree in a technical area, whereas acquisition managers are not
required to hold a technical degree. We have previously reported that DOD
and Air Force officials have expressed concern that there are not enough
experienced acquisition managers to run space programs or enough experts
in software engineering. These officials also commented that acquisition
managers for space systems are often not equipped to understand what is
behind a contractor's proposal.38

37 10 U.S.C. S: 8084.

The Air Force has not specifically identified the personnel who work on
space acquisition programs within any of its existing career fields
because, as previously mentioned, there is an ongoing debate within the
Air Force over the extent to which space acquisition is different enough
from non-space acquisition to warrant tailored training, education, career
path development, or a combination of these. However, DOD believes that
space is different because of the complexity of space systems and the
inability to recall space systems once they are launched. The need for
space systems that operate properly upon launch is reflected in the fact
that a high proportion of the cost of developing a space system is devoted
to system acquisition rather than to operations and support, as is the
case with non-space acquisition programs. Personnel with technical and
space acquisition knowledge are therefore important in ensuring that
complex space systems are developed and acquired successfully.

As previously mentioned, the acquisition manager career field is the one
acquisition career field in the space acquisition workforce that does not
require a technical degree. We believe that at a minimum, establishing a
space acquisition specialty within the Air Force's existing acquisition
manager career field39 could identify the space acquisition workforce and
direct standardized education and training requirements specific to space
acquisition for all personnel involved in managing space acquisition
programs. Although we are not arguing for a separate category for space
acquisition within the DAWIA construct, we do believe that establishing a
specialty within the Air Force's acquisition manager career field would
also provide the Air Force with a mechanism to apply strategic workforce
management principles to the space acquisition workforce, as is done by
leading public and private organizations. Without a career field or
specialty within a career field that addresses standardized education and
training requirements specific to space acquisition, the Air Force may
lack visibility over the capabilities and career paths of its space
acquisition personnel and therefore may not have the ability to
strategically manage the workforce and ensure that space acquisition
personnel can effectively supervise and oversee development of new space
systems.

38 GAO, Defense Acquisitions: Incentives and Pressures That Drive Problems
Affecting Satellite and Related Acquisitions, GAO-05-570R (Washington,
D.C.: June 23, 2005).

39 According to Air Force Instruction 36-2101, p.6, an Air Force Specialty
Code (AFSC) is the basic grouping of positions requiring similar skills
and qualifications. An AFSC is further grouped into career field ladders,
career field subdivisions, and career fields to provide for career
development in different aspects of a career field. An AFSC may be
subdivided by alphabetical "shredouts" to identify specialization in a
specific type of equipment or function. See also Air Force Manual 36-2105,
p. 5.

  Decrease in Acquisition Officers with Technical Degrees Entering SMC

In addition, there has been a decrease in the number of acquisition
officers entering SMC with technical degrees, a pattern that has
paralleled the overall decline in U.S. citizens and permanent residents
earning bachelor's degrees in science and engineering at U.S. institutions
in the 1990s. The percentage of new acquisition managers coming into the
Air Force with technical degrees, including those in charge of acquiring
space systems, has declined over the past 15 years, from 68 percent in
1990 to 16 percent in 2005. There has been a similar decrease in new
acquisition managers at SMC who possess technical degrees during this same
period, although Air Force Space Command, which includes SMC, has more
officers with technical bachelor's degrees than does the Air Force as a
whole. Title 10 of the United States Code40 directs the Secretary of the
Air Force to establish and implement policies and procedures to develop a
career field for Air Force officers with technical competence in
space-related matters so that these officers have the capability to
develop space doctrine and concepts of space operations, develop space
systems, and operate space systems. Although acquisition managers, unlike
scientists and engineers, are not required to hold technical degrees,
officials and space acquisition officers we interviewed considered it
desirable. Because this decrease in technically educated acquisition
managers parallels a decline during the 1990s in the number of U.S.
citizens and permanent residents receiving bachelor's degrees in science
and engineering, it appears at least partly attributable to the drop in
the national supply rather than to the preferences of Air Force officials.
Entering the acquisition workforce with a technical degree could be
particularly useful at SMC, where there is a high proportion of junior
officers who, as acquisition managers, begin supervising experienced
contractors early in their careers. Conversely, acquisition managers
without technical degrees may be at a disadvantage in evaluating proposals
and conducting progress reviews. Moreover, the overall decline in the
national pool of technical expertise also limits the Air Force's ability
to rely on contractors and civilians to offset the decline of expertise
among military personnel. Over the past few years, however, the national
number of U.S. citizens and permanent residents earning bachelor's degrees
in science and engineering has increased, but the number of new
acquisition managers entering the Air Force with technical degrees
continues to decrease, according to Air Force Personnel Center data.

40 10 U.S.C. S: 8084.

  Limited Space Acquisition Training

The limited availability of training that focuses on space acquisition
also contributes to the shortage of technically proficient personnel. For
example, DAU does not incorporate space-specific training into its
required curricula for the acquisition workforce and the Air Force's NSSI
offers limited acquisition content in its curricula for the space
workforce. NSSI's 4-week intermediate- and senior-level courses-Space 200
and Space 300-have 2 1/2 and 3 days of acquisition content, respectively.
Although DAU, in collaboration with NSSI, has developed a course that
focuses on the acquisition process guidance for DOD space programs-known
as the National Security Space Acquisition Policy-this course is in the
form of a continuous learning module (CLM), which is an online course. We
note that after our inquiry about the amount of space acquisition
training, NSSI designated this space CLM as a prerequisite to the Space
200 course. Because of the lack of space acquisition training, SMC has
developed a space acquisition school, which provides initial qualification
training before an officer is assigned to a system program office.
Similarly, NRO has an Acquisition Center of Excellence, which provides
NRO-centered acquisition training to less experienced personnel assigned
to NRO. However, without adding more space-specific content to DAU's
courses and adding more acquisition content to NSSI's courses, the Air
Force may lose an opportunity to broaden the pool of personnel who are
qualified to serve in space acquisition positions. Moreover, as the Air
Force prepares to carry out force reductions, it will become increasingly
important to get the best-qualified people to fill space acquisition
positions; moreover, those who are assigned may not have the luxury of
extended training periods. As a result, the Air Force may not have enough
technically proficient space acquisition personnel within the existing
space acquisition workforce to meet national security space needs.

                                  Conclusions

Congress and DOD have repeatedly emphasized that qualified space personnel
are critical to the success of space systems. Although the Air Force has
made progress in identifying, training, and providing career path guidance
to its space cadre, more remains to be accomplished. The Air Force is
managing its existing space acquisition workforce using some facets of the
strategic workforce planning model that is used by leading organizations;
however, neither DOD nor the Air Force has developed a separate workforce
strategy, as they have for other workforce groups, because there is a lack
of consensus about the merits of doing so. While the lack of a separate
strategy is not necessarily a deficiency, we continue to believe that DOD
and the Air Force need to ensure that the personnel who are essential to
developing and acquiring national security space systems are effectively
managed. Without performing an integrated and zero-based space acquisition
workforce needs assessment and using the results to inform its force
reduction planning, the Air Force may not be able to manage the impact of
its planned force reductions on the space acquisition workforce or take
actions to mitigate the impact to ensure it has the quantity and quality
of space acquisition personnel needed to accomplish its space mission.
Moreover, the Air Force has not developed a space acquisition career field
or specialty for its officers to ensure technical competence in space
acquisition-related matters, including the ability to develop space
systems. Without increased space and acquisition-related training and a
career field or specialty that addresses standardized education, training,
and career path development requirements specific to space acquisition,
the Air Force may lack visibility over the capabilities and career paths
of its space acquisition personnel and therefore may not have the ability
ensure that space acquisition personnel can effectively supervise and
oversee development of new space systems. Additionally, without a career
field or specialty, the Air Force may find it more difficult to apply
strategic workforce management principles to the space acquisition
workforce. Without adequate numbers of technically proficient personnel to
meet national security space needs, the government may have to rely more
on contractors to fill the gap, but reliance on contractors may become
more difficult as the Air Force conducts its force shaping. Current force
shaping plans call for 25 percent cuts in contractor and FFRDC support.
SMC currently relies on an FFRDC to supplement its technical support
needs. Without such support, the Air Force may be unable to maintain the
necessary expertise on legacy systems and fully support emerging space
programs.

                      Recommendations for Executive Action

We recommend that the Secretary of Defense direct the Secretary of the Air
Force to take the following three actions:

           o  Direct that an integrated, zero-based needs assessment of space
           acquisition personnel be performed and then incorporated into the
           Air Force's force reduction planning and process improvement
           efforts in order to ensure that the resulting force structure is
           optimally balanced among workforce segments-that is, military,
           civilian, contractor, those who work on classified and
           unclassified programs, and FFRDC support personnel-and functional
           areas, such as classified and unclassified space systems.
           o  Institutionalize and manage a space-specific specialty within
           the Air Force's acquisition manager career field in order to
           ensure that all incumbents in the space acquisition workforce,
           including personnel at SMC and NRO, have strong technical
           backgrounds and to better manage the career paths and retention of
           technical personnel in accordance with strategic workforce
           management principles.
           o  Improve training by providing greater acquisition-specific
           content in the Air Force's NSSI's curricula in order to broaden
           the pool of personnel who are qualified to fill space acquisition
           positions.

           We recommend that the Secretary of Defense direct the Under
           Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics to
           take the following action:

           o  Improve training by bolstering space-specific content in DAU's
           curricula in order to broaden the pool of personnel who are
           qualified to fill space acquisition positions.

           Agency Comments and Our Evaluation
			  
			  Both DOD and NRO provided us comments on a draft of this report.
           DOD provided specific comments on whether it concurred or did not
           concur with each of our recommendations. NRO provided comments;
           however, it declined to concur or not concur with our
           recommendations because it believes that the recommendations fall
           within the purview of the Air Force.

           DOD concurred with our recommendation on improving training at DAU
           but only partially concurred with our remaining recommendations.
           Regarding our recommendation that the Air Force conduct an
           integrated, zero-based needs assessment and incorporate it into
           the Air Force's force reduction planning and process improvement
           efforts, DOD partially concurred, stating that a needs assessment
           of space acquisition personnel is important and that it must be
           integrated as part of the component's force planning and process
           improvement initiatives. This statement mirrors our recommendation
           and reaffirms our discussion in this report.

           DOD partially concurred with our recommendation that the Air Force
           institutionalize and manage a space-specific specialty within the
           Air Force's acquisition manager career field. We agree with DOD
           that the Air Force Space Professional Development Program has
           identified and continues to track space-specific experience, and
           we relied on the space experience codes found in Air Force Space
           Command's database for portions of our analysis. DOD also stated
           that this process enables effective career management while still
           affording the flexibility to use individuals in other assignments;
           however, we think that its process still does not provide adequate
           visibility over the career paths of space acquisition personnel.
           For example, we attempted to obtain certain information, such as
           promotion rates, for space acquisition personnel, and found that
           the Air Force was not tracking this information as part of the Air
           Force Space Professional Development Program. We believe that
           having a specialty would allow the Air Force to track such
           information to provide more effective strategic human capital
           management. Furthermore, implementing our recommendation would not
           diminish the Air Force's flexibility to use these individuals in
           any positions that Air Force requirements dictate. As our report
           points out, a specialty within the acquisition manager career
           field would be a better means of providing visibility and
           management of personnel involved in managing space acquisition
           programs, such as by tracking the numbers of officers (and
           civilians) who are attaining senior levels and establishing
           standardized training and education requirements specific to space
           acquisition. As the Air Force determines its priorities, we
           continue to believe that at a minimum, having a space-specific
           specialty would give it the visibility that it currently lacks
           over this important segment of its workforce.

           DOD partially concurred with our recommendation to improve
           training by providing greater acquisition-specific content in the
           curricula of the Air Force's NSSI. Although DOD concurred that
           more space acquisition training is needed, it noted that NSSI is
           only one forum for such training. However, we note that NSSI is,
           according to its own mission statement, the DOD center of
           excellence for space education throughout the national security
           space community and that its acquisition content is limited. While
           we acknowledge that there are other venues for training in space
           acquisition, including DAU, we focused on NSSI because of its role
           as DOD's single focal point for space education and training.

           Lastly, DOD concurred with our recommendation to improve training
           by bolstering space-specific content in DAU's curricula. In its
           comments, DOD listed some of the ways in which DAU has expanded
           its support of the space acquisition community. We acknowledge
           these efforts and noted in our report that DAU has already
           developed a CLM related to the space acquisition process. However,
           we continue to believe that additional space-specific content is
           needed in DAU's curricula in order to increase the pool of
           personnel who are qualified to fill space acquisition positions.
           Adding such space-specific content would allow more acquisition
           officers to receive a baseline level of training in space
           acquisition through DAU. This baseline level of training would
           help ensure that acquisition officers do not arrive in space
           acquisition assignments with little or no knowledge of
           space-specific acquisitions, such as is currently often the case
           at the SMC. In this way, the recommendation is also intended to
           maximize Air Force flexibility in assigning its acquisition
           officers to space acquisition positions, the importance of which
           was noted by DOD in its response to our second recommendation.

           NRO provided us comments regarding specific issues discussed in
           the report. Regarding our observation that the percentage of
           acquisition personnel certified at the highest level at SMC
           dropped between 1996 and 2005, NRO stated that its hiring policies
           may currently exacerbate the problems at SMC. We agree. We also
           agree with NRO, and have stated in our report, that a variety of
           factors have contributed to SMC's shortage of qualified space
           acquisition personnel with a technical education. In an atmosphere
           of overall shortage, however, SMC's lower staffing priority means
           that other organizations therefore have a higher level of access
           to a comparatively senior workforce, whose members are, as NRO
           stated, able to work on complex systems, hold high clearances, and
           work in a multiagency environment with significant levels of
           autonomy. Moreover, we acknowledge, and stated in our report, that
           there is no consensus on a space acquisition career field within
           DOD. However, as we have mentioned earlier, we continue to believe
           that a space acquisition specialty within the existing acquisition
           manager career field could both strengthen career path management
           and ensure that those who manage space programs have strong
           technical backgrounds by addressing standardized training and
           education requirements specific to space acquisition. In addition,
           we also agree with NRO and noted in our report that there are a
           variety of factors that have contributed to Air Force-wide
           acquisition workforce shortages, such as 1990s workforce
           management decisions.

           DOD and NRO comments are reprinted in their entirety in appendix
           II and appendix III, respectively. DOD and NRO did not provide
           technical comments on this report.

           We are sending copies of this report to interested congressional
           committees; the Secretary of Defense; the DOD Executive Agent for
           Space; the Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force; the
           Commanding General, U.S. Air Force Space Command; and the
           Director, National Reconnaissance Office. We will also make copies
           available to others upon request. In addition, this report is
           available at no charge on the GAO Web site at http://www.gao.gov .

           If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please
           contact me at (202) 512-5431 or [email protected]. Contact points
           for our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may
           be found on the last page of this report. GAO staff who made key
           contributions to this report are listed in appendix IV.

           Sincerely yours,

           Davi M. D'Agostino Director, Defense Capabilities and Management

           Appendix I: Scope and Methodology
			  
			  To determine the extent to which the Air Force has addressed
           strategies for critical skill sets, training, recruiting,
           promotion, and career path development for the space acquisition
           workforce, we reviewed human capital strategies pertaining to the
           Department of Defense (DOD) acquisition workforce and the Air
           Force space cadre. We compared the DOD and Air Force documents to
           the strategic human capital planning model that is generally
           accepted by the National Academy for Public Administration, the
           Office of Personnel Management, and other leading public and
           private sector organizations. We analyzed the documents to
           ascertain whether they addressed each of the elements of a
           comprehensive workforce planning strategy as well as whether they
           addressed the five career stages listed above. We also discussed
           workforce strategic planning with cognizant officials in the
           Office of the Secretary of Defense; the National Security Space
           Office; U.S. Air Force Space Command, Peterson Air Force Base,
           Colorado; the Air Force Manpower Agency, Randolph Air Force Base,
           Texas; the Office of the Secretary of the Air Force for
           Acquisition, Arlington, Virginia; the Directorate of Space
           Acquisition, Arlington, Virginia; and the Office of the Deputy
           Chief of Staff of the Air Force for Manpower and Personnel,
           Arlington, Virginia. We noted the actions that DOD and the Air
           Force had taken to manage the Air Force's workforce using a
           strategic workforce management approach, but we did not evaluate
           the sufficiency of the actions they took. To gather information on
           Army and Navy strategies and plans, we interviewed officials at
           the Army Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations and
           Plans, Arlington, Virginia; U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense
           Command, Arlington, Virginia; and the Office of the Navy Space
           Cadre Advisor, Arlington, Virginia.

           To determine the extent to which the Air Force has addressed how
           sufficient numbers of space acquisition personnel are provided to
           meet DOD's current and projected national security space needs, we
           collected and compared recent data on acquisition positions and
           personnel from the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Air
           Force for Acquisition and from the Office of the Deputy Chief of
           Staff of the Air Force for Manpower and Personnel, Arlington,
           Virginia, as well as from Air Force Headquarters. We also received
           overall workforce figures from the National Reconnaissance Office,
           Chantilly, Virginia, that were current as of March 2006. We
           limited our analysis to technical acquisition personnel who are
           included in the Air Force's credentialed space professional
           program, which corresponded to Air Force Specialty Codes 61S
           (scientist), 62E (engineer), and 63A (acquisition manager). We
           excluded Air Force Specialty Codes 64P (contracting) and 65F
           (financial management) from our scope since these acquisition
           codes are not currently included as Air Force credentialed space
           professionals. We also excluded civilians and enlisted personnel
           from our scope, since the Air Force has not completed its
           identification of civilian and enlisted space professionals, as
           well as contractors, since contractors are not currently included
           as Air Force credentialed space professionals. We also interviewed
           officials at the Air Force Personnel Center, Randolph Air Force
           Base, Texas; U.S. Air Force Space Command, Peterson Air Force
           Base, Colorado; Space and Missile Systems Center, Los Angeles Air
           Force Base, California; the Office of the Secretary of the Air
           Force for Acquisition, Arlington, Virginia; and the Office of
           Security and Special Programs Oversight, Arlington, Virginia.

           To determine the extent to which the Air Force has addressed
           whether space acquisition personnel are adequately qualified for
           their positions, we collected and analyzed data on space
           acquisition positions and personnel from U.S. Air Force Space
           Command, Peterson Air Force Base, Colorado, and the Space and
           Missile Systems Center, Los Angeles Air Force Base, California,
           and conducted discussion groups about topics including education
           and prior experience with junior and midgrade officers at Space
           and Missile Systems Center, Los Angeles Air Force Base,
           California. We reviewed National Science Foundation data as of May
           2006 and Air Force Personnel Center data as of March 2006 in order
           to determine the extent to which new Air Force acquisition
           managers hold technical degrees and the extent to which the
           numbers represent a national trend. We also interviewed officials
           at Air Force Personnel Center, Randolph Air Force Base, Texas; the
           Office of the Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition,
           Arlington, Virginia; and the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff
           of the Air Force for Manpower and Personnel, Arlington, Virginia.
           The Space and Missile Systems Center database is current as of
           February 2006, and the space professional database is current as
           of March 2006. We used the Space and Missile Systems Center
           database and the space professional database, obtained from Air
           Force Space Command, to analyze the certification and experience
           levels of acquisition officers at the Space and Missile Systems
           Center and Air Force-wide. We did this by examining their degree
           and certification levels, as well as duty histories, and comparing
           them with the certification requirements of the Air Force's
           Acquisition Professional Development Program and Space
           Professional Development Program. To assess comparative
           certification and experience levels between unclassified and
           classified space acquisition personnel, we used the Space and
           Missile Systems Center database and the space professional
           database and compared the results. We also used these two
           databases to analyze the prior experience and education of
           acquisition managers working on unclassified space systems and
           acquisition managers working on classified space systems. We
           examined acquisition officers' degree and certification levels, as
           well as duty histories, and compared them with the certification
           requirements of the Air Force's acquisition professional
           development program and space professional development program. To
           capture the acquisition officers working on unclassified space
           systems, we used all Space and Missile Systems Center acquisition
           officers except for those acquisition officers working in the
           Space Superiority system program office, which is a classified
           space system. Although we did not have detailed personnel data
           from the National Reconnaissance Office, we were able to search
           the space professional database for certain key elements that were
           known to indicate classified space positions; and we used the
           acquisition officers thus identified to represent the classified
           space acquisition workforce. These key elements included whether
           the acquisition officer worked at the Space and Missile Systems
           Center's Space Superiority system program office; was in a space
           position that required a very high-level security clearance; or
           was in a space position with an experience code that indicated
           work at certain classified space locations, including the National
           Reconnaissance Office. In the interest of issuing an unclassified
           product, we did not attempt to identify whether specific
           individuals worked at the National Reconnaissance Office or
           another intelligence agency. We also reviewed applicable National
           Reconnaissance Office directives and interviewed officials from
           the National Reconnaissance Office, Chantilly, Virginia; the Space
           and Missile Systems Center, Los Angeles Air Force Base,
           California; and Air Force Headquarters. In addition, we used the
           Space and Missile Systems Center database and the space
           professional database to analyze records of officers who either
           work in the Space Superiority system program office or have had
           intelligence-related assignments in the past. We assessed the
           reliability of Air Force Space Command's space professional
           database and the Space and Missile Systems Center database by (1)
           reviewing existing information about the data and the system that
           provided them, (2) interviewing Air Force and contractor officials
           knowledgeable about the data, and (3) comparing information in the
           databases. We determined that the data in these databases were
           sufficiently reliable for the purposes of this report. We also
           assessed the reliability of the data provided by the Air Force
           Personnel Center and determined that these data were sufficiently
           reliable for the purposes of this report. To determine the extent
           to which acquisition is reflected in space training, we reviewed
           and discussed the curricula of the National Security Space
           Institute's Space 200 and 300 courses; to determine the extent to
           which space is reflected in acquisition training, we reviewed the
           Defense Acquisition University's catalog. We also interviewed
           officials from both organizations, including Defense Acquisition
           University consultants to the National Security Space Institute
           and the Space and Missile Systems Center.

           Part of our analysis regarding the quantity and quality of the
           space acquisition workforce was limited because of the lack of
           data from the National Reconnaissance Office. As noted above, the
           National Reconnaissance Office did provide us the overall number
           of Air Force personnel assigned to that agency, but it did not
           provide us information on the education, experience, or expertise
           of its space acquisition personnel. As a result, we could not
           directly compare the education, experience, or expertise of the
           space acquisition workforce at the Space and Missile Systems
           Center and the National Reconnaissance Office, and we could not
           compare the workforces at these two locations collectively to the
           Air Force acquisition workforce overall. In this regard, we were
           only able to compare the Space and Missile Systems Center
           personnel to the Air Force acquisition workforce overall.

           We performed our work from October 2005 through June 2006 in
           accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.

           Appendix II: Comments from the Department of Defense
 
           Appendix III: Comments from the National Reconnaissance Office
			  
			  Note: GAO comments supplementing those in the report text appear at the
           end of this appendix.

See comment 1.
			  
			  The following is GAO's comment on NRO's letter dated September 6,
           2006.
			  		  
                        1. NRO also commented upon GAO's requests for
                        information related to NRO's space acquisition
                        personnel. The NRO did provide us with the overall
                        number of Air Force personnel assigned to NRO, but in
                        its letter providing this information, NRO noted that
                        it could not disaggregate the personnel information
                        without revealing intelligence community information.
                        We submitted a second request for information to the
                        Air Force Personnel Center, but this request was
                        ultimately forwarded to NRO, on the grounds that only
                        NRO could provide the data, where it was declined for
                        similar reasons. In our report, we noted that we did
                        not have detailed information about NRO's space
                        acquisition workforce, as we did for SMC's space
                        acquisition workforce, since this affected our
                        ability to report on the entire space acquisition
                        workforce.

  

           Appendix IV: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments
			  
			  GAO Contact
			  
			  Davi M. D'Agostino (202) 512-5431 or [email protected]

           Acknowledgments
			  
			  In addition to the contact named above, Lorelei St. James,
           Assistant Director; Gabrielle A. Carrington; Barbara Hills; Linda
           S. Keefer; Ron La Due Lake; Julie Matta; Sally L. Newman; Jerome
           Sandau; and Cheryl Weissman made key contributions to this report.

           GAOï¿½s Mission
			  
			  The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and
           investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in
           meeting its constitutional responsibilities and to help improve
           the performance and accountability of the federal government for
           the American people. GAO examines the use of public funds;
           evaluates federal programs and policies; and provides analyses,
           recommendations, and other assistance to help Congress make
           informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO's
           commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of
           accountability, integrity, and reliability.

           Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony
			  
			  The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at
           no cost is through GAO's Web site ( www.gao.gov ). Each weekday,
           GAO posts newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence on
           its Web site. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted
           products every afternoon, go to www.gao.gov and select "Subscribe
           to Updates."

           Order by Mail or Phone
			  
			  The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies
           are $2 each. A check or money order should be made out to the
           Superintendent of Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard.
           Orders for 100 or more copies mailed to a single address are
           discounted 25 percent. Orders should be sent to:

           U.S. Government Accountability Office 441 G Street NW, Room LM
           Washington, D.C. 20548

           To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 TDD: (202) 512-2537 Fax:
           (202) 512-6061

           To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs
			  
			  Contact:

           Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm E-mail:
           [email protected] Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or
           (202) 512-7470

           Congressional Relations
			  
			  Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, [email protected] (202) 512-4400
           U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125
           Washington, D.C. 20548

           Congressional Relations
			  
			  Paul Anderson, Managing Director, [email protected] (202)
           512-4800 U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW,
           Room 7149 Washington, D.C. 20548
                   
(350741)

transparent illustrator graphic

www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt? GAO-06-908 .

To view the full product, including the scope
and methodology, click on the link above.

For more information, contact Davi M. D'Agostino at (202) 512-5431 or
[email protected].

Highlights of GAO-06-908 , a report to the Chairman, Subcommittee on
Strategic Forces, Committee on Armed Services, House of Representatives

September 2006

DEFENSE SPACEACTIVITIES

Management Actions Are Needed to Better Identify, Track, and Train Air
Force Space Personnel

The Department of Defense (DOD) relies on space to support a wide range of
vital military missions. Many factors contribute to DOD success in space
activities, and having sufficient quantities of space-qualified personnel
to design, oversee, and acquire space assets, on which DOD expects to
spend about $20 billion in fiscal year 2007, is critical to DOD's ability
to carry out its mission. The individual services are responsible for
providing adequately qualified space personnel to meet mission needs. The
Air Force provides over 90 percent of the space personnel to DOD's
mission, but has not identified the space acquisition workforce. This
report examines the extent to which (1) the Air Force's space acquisition
workforce is managed using a strategic workforce management approach, (2)
there are sufficient numbers of Air Force space acquisition personnel to
meet DOD's national security needs, and (3) the Air Force's space
acquisition personnel are adequately qualified for their positions. For
its analysis, GAO identified the space acquisition workforce as those Air
Force scientists, engineers, and program managers with experience
developing space assets.

What GAO Recommends

GAO makes recommendations to DOD to take actions to better manage its
limited pool of space acquisition personnel. DOD concurred or partially
concurred with the recommendations.

While DOD and the Air Force have not achieved consensus about whether the
space acquisition workforce should have a designated career field or a
separate workforce strategy, the Air Force is responsible for
strategically managing this segment of its workforce as it has for other
workforce groups, such as pilots and navigators. The Air Force has done
needs assessments on certain segments of its space workforce, but has not
done an integrated, zero-based needs assessment of its space acquisition
workforce. Such a strategic assessment would help inform the Air Force's
planned force reduction that will result in a decrease of 40,000 active
personnel and a 25 percent reduction of contractor support over 5 years.
However, the Air Force is not using a zero-based needs assessment that
includes the entire space acquisition workforce-unclassified and
classified programs and military, civilian, and contractor personnel-as
part of its force reduction planning and process improvement efforts. Such
an assessment would identify if there are skill and competency gaps. As a
result, the Air Force may not be able to manage the impact of its force
reductions on the space acquisition workforce or take actions to mitigate
the impact to ensure this workforce meets national security space needs.

In the absence of an integrated, zero-based needs assessment of its space
acquisition workforce and a career field specialty, the Air Force cannot
ensure that it has enough space acquisition personnel or personnel who are
technically proficient to meet national security space needs. The Air
Force has a shortage of midgrade and senior officers who play vital
management and oversight roles in space acquisition. At the Space and
Missile Systems Center (SMC), 37 percent of the critical acquisition
positions were vacant as of April 2006 and about 50 percent of the
center's workload was being done by contractors. Also, the National
Reconnaissance Office (NRO) depends on Air Force personnel to fill many of
its key space acquisition positions. Continuing shortages may hamper SMC's
and NRO's ability to meet mission needs and highlight the Air Force's need
to strategically manage its space acquisition workforce.

The technical proficiency of the Air Force's space acquisition workforce
also may not be adequate to meet national security needs. At SMC, the
percentage of space acquisition officers with the highest acquisition
certification level dropped from 28 percent in 1996 to 15 percent in 2005.
Reasons for the lower certification levels include NRO priority in
selecting personnel, the lack of a space acquisition specialty, limited
training, and the decline of personnel coming into the Air Force with
technical degrees. Although required by law, the Air Force has not
developed a career field for officers to develop space systems. Without a
specialty to identify these personnel and increased space
acquisition-related education and training, the Air Force may not be able
to strategically manage its workforce and ensure personnel can effectively
develop space systems.
*** End of document. ***