    The Department of Defense's Civilian Human Capital Strategic Plan
    Does Not Meet Most Statutory Requirements (06-FEB-08,
    GAO-08-439R).

    The achievement of the Department of Defense's (DOD) mission is
    dependent in large part on the skills and expertise of its
    civilian workforce--which consists of almost 700,000 personnel,
    who develop policy, provide intelligence, manage finances, and
    acquire and maintain weapon systems. With more than 50 percent of
    its civilian personnel becoming eligible to retire in the next
    few years, DOD may find it difficult to fill certain
    mission-critical jobs with qualified personnel. Strategic
    workforce planning, an integral part of human capital management,
    helps ensure that an organization has staff with the necessary
    skills and competencies to accomplish its strategic goals. We
    have previously reported that it is critical that DOD engage in
    effective strategic workforce planning to ensure that its human
    capital reforms have maximum effectiveness and value. In 2007, we
    reported that strategic human capital management remained a
    high-risk area because the federal government now faces one of
    the most significant transformations to the civil service in half
    a century, as momentum grows toward making governmentwide changes
    to agency pay, classification, and performance management
    systems. In January 2006, the National Defense Authorization Act
    for Fiscal Year 20065 directed DOD to develop and submit to the
    Senate and House Armed Services Committees a strategic plan to
    shape and improve the DOD civilian employee workforce. Section
    1122 (b) of the act provided that the plan address eight
    requirements. On November 6, 2007--ten months after the due
    date--DOD submitted to the committees both its plan titled
    "Department of Defense Civilian Human Capital Strategic Plan
    2006-2010," and its implementation report titled "The Department
    of Defense Human Capital Strategic Plan for Civilian Employees of
    the Department of Defense, Fiscal Year 2006 Implementation
    Report." This latter DOD report, however, noted that it responded
    to section 1122(d) of the act. In addition to the mandate for
    DOD, the act also required GAO to review and report on the human
    capital strategic plan DOD submitted to meet its mandate no later
    than 90 days after DOD's submission. Accordingly, we examined the
    extent to which DOD's civilian human capital strategic plan
    addresses the reporting requirements mandated by the act.
    -------------------------Indexing Terms-------------------------
    REPORTNUM:   GAO-08-439R
        ACCNO:   A80553
      TITLE:     The Department of Defense's Civilian Human Capital
    Strategic Plan Does Not Meet Most Statutory Requirements
         DATE:   02/06/2008
      SUBJECT:   Civilian employees
    	     Data collection
    	     Data integrity
    	     Employee retention
    	     Human capital
    	     Human capital management
    	     Human capital planning
    	     Personnel management
    	     Personnel recruiting
    	     Reporting requirements
    	     Requirements definition
    	     Risk management
    	     Skilled labor
    	     Staff utilization
    	     Strategic planning
    	     Assessments
    	     Executive agency oversight
    	     DOD Civilian Human Capital Strategic
    	     Plan

    	     GAO High Risk Series

    ******************************************************************
    ** 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-08-439R

    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. 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.

    February 6, 2008:

    The Honorable Carl Levin:
    Chairman:
    The Honorable John McCain:
    Ranking Member:
    Committee on Armed Services:
    United States Senate:

    The Honorable Ike Skelton:
    Chairman:
    The Honorable Duncan Hunter:
    Ranking Member:
    Committee on Armed Services:
    House of Representatives:

    Subject: The Department of Defense's Civilian Human Capital Strategic
    Plan Does Not Meet Most Statutory Requirements:

    The achievement of the Department of Defense's (DOD) mission is
    dependent in large part on the skills and expertise of its civilian
    workforce--which consists of almost 700,000 personnel, who develop
    policy, provide intelligence, manage finances, and acquire and maintain
    weapon systems. With more than 50 percent of its civilian personnel
    becoming eligible to retire in the next few years, DOD may find it
    difficult to fill certain mission-critical jobs with qualified
    personnel. Strategic workforce planning, an integral part of human
    capital management, helps ensure that an organization has staff with
    the necessary skills and competencies[Footnote 1] to accomplish its
    strategic goals. We have previously reported that it is critical that
    DOD engage in effective strategic workforce planning to ensure that its
    human capital reforms have maximum effectiveness and value.

    In 2007, we reported that strategic human capital management remained a
    high-risk area because the federal government now faces one of the most
    significant transformations to the civil service in half a century, as
    momentum grows toward making governmentwide changes to agency pay,
    classification, and performance management systems.[Footnote 2] In our
    prior work examining various aspects of DOD's human capital management
    of its civilian workforce, we found that, while DOD has developed and
    implemented civilian strategic workforce plans to address future
    civilian workforce needs, the plans generally lacked some key elements
    essential to successful workforce planning.[Footnote 3] For example,
    none of the plans included analyses of the gaps between critical
    skills[Footnote 4] and competencies currently needed by the workforce
    and those that will be needed in the future. Without such gap analyses,
    we noted that DOD and its components may not be able to effectively
    design strategies to hire, develop, and retain the best possible
    workforce.

    In January 2006, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
    2006[Footnote 5] directed DOD to develop and submit to the Senate and
    House Armed Services Committees a strategic plan to shape and improve
    the DOD civilian employee workforce. Section 1122 (b) of the act
    provided that the plan address eight requirements. These included an
    assessment of existing and future critical skills and competencies
    needed to support national security and manage the department over the
    next decade, and an assessment of any existing gaps. In addition, DOD
    was to develop and submit a plan of action to address identified gaps,
    including specific recruiting and retention goals and strategies on how
    to train, compensate, and motivate civilian employees. Furthermore, the
    act required the Secretary of Defense to submit the plan not later than
    1 year after enactment of the act, which occurred on January 6, 2006.
    Accordingly, DOD's plan was due on January 6, 2007. On November 6,
    2007--ten months after the due date--DOD submitted to the committees
    both its plan titled "Department of Defense Civilian Human Capital
    Strategic Plan 2006-2010," and its implementation report titled "The
    Department of Defense Human Capital Strategic Plan for Civilian
    Employees of the Department of Defense, Fiscal Year 2006 Implementation
    Report." This latter DOD report, however, noted that it responded to
    section 1122(d) of the act.[Footnote 6] In this report, we will
    hereafter refer to these two documents collectively as DOD's civilian
    human capital strategic plan.

    In addition to the mandate for DOD, the act also required GAO to review
    and report on the human capital strategic plan DOD submitted to meet
    its mandate no later than 90 days after DOD's submission. Accordingly,
    we examined the extent to which DOD's civilian human capital strategic
    plan addresses the reporting requirements mandated by the act.

    To examine the extent to which DOD's civilian human capital strategic
    plan addresses congressional reporting requirements, we obtained and
    analyzed the "Department of Defense Civilian Human Capital Strategic
    Plan 2006-2010" and "The Department of Defense Human Capital Strategic
    Plan for Civilian Employees of the Department of Defense, Fiscal Year
    2006 Implementation Report," along with other documents. We analyzed
    the content of these documents and compared them to the requirements of
    the 2006 act. We also discussed the plan with officials within the
    Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness,
    the Office of the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Civilian
    Personnel Policy, and the Civilian Personnel Management Service. We
    conducted this performance audit from November 2007 to February 2008 in
    accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. Those
    standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
    sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our
    findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that
    the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and
    conclusions based on our audit objectives.

    Summary:

    Overall, DOD's civilian human capital strategic plan does not meet most
    statutory requirements. First, the plan partially addresses some but
    not all aspects of two of the congressional reporting requirements
    established in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
    2006. Specifically, DOD's plan includes a list of mission-critical
    occupations needed for the current civilian workforce, but this list
    does not constitute the required assessment of skills of the existing
    workforce. Second, and most importantly, the plan does not address the
    majority--six of eight--of the congressional reporting requirements.
    For example, the plan does not include an assessment of current mission-
    critical competencies, future critical skills and competencies needed,
    gaps between the current and future needs, or specific recruiting and
    retention goals, even though these elements are required by the 2006
    act. DOD officials acknowledged that the plan they submitted to the
    committees is incomplete. We note that the plan refers, in several
    places, to information related to DOD's mandate, but indicates that
    those items may be addressed at a later time. In addition, DOD
    officials stated that some of these items may be addressed in other
    documents. For example, DOD officials told us that a recent
    report[Footnote 7] may contain information that addresses portions of
    the mandate. While we reviewed some of the information in this report,
    it was not submitted to the committees pursuant to the 2006 act; thus,
    it cannot be considered as meeting the mandate. Moreover, our initial
    review of the document showed that, while it may address some of the
    requirements in DOD's mandate, it still may not address other aspects
    of the mandate because, for example, it does not cover the time frames
    Congress directed--that is, over the next decade. Without complete
    information on DOD's civilian human capital plan, to include analyses
    of gaps between critical skills and competencies needed by the current
    and future workforce, Congress will not have the information it needs
    to conduct effective oversight over DOD's efforts to hire, develop, and
    retain the best possible civilian workforce. Accordingly, we are
    recommending that DOD submit to Congress a civilian human capital
    strategic plan that addresses all of the statutory requirements. DOD
    disagreed with our recommendation noting that its response to the
    congressional reporting requirements reflected a centralized enterprise-
    wide strategic perspective--as opposed to providing the information
    specified by the law, such as recruiting and retention goals. The law
    required DOD's plan to contain very specific quantitative data and
    assessments. Since DOD's plan did not address the law's requirements,
    we continue to believe that our recommendation is valid.

    Background:

    We have previously examined various aspects of DOD's human capital
    management of its civilian workforce. For example, in June 2004, we
    reported that DOD has developed and implemented civilian strategic
    workforce plans to address future civilian workforce needs; however,
    DOD's plans generally lacked some key elements essential to successful
    workforce planning.[Footnote 8] To improve the comprehensiveness of
    strategic workforce planning for the DOD civilian workforce, we
    recommended that the department (1) analyze and document critical
    skills and competency gaps between its current and future workforces
    and (2) develop workforce strategies to address identified workforce
    gaps in skills and competencies. DOD partially concurred with both
    recommendations and stated, for the first recommendation, that the
    value of conducting a global analysis between current competencies and
    those needed for the future for over 650,000 jobs was unclear. Our
    recommendation did not suggest that DOD conduct a global gap analysis,
    but rather that it perform an analysis of the gaps between current
    critical skills and competencies. On the second recommendation DOD
    stated, among other things, that it uses existing flexibilities such as
    recruitment and retention bonuses and relocation allowances. While we
    acknowledged that DOD and its components had implemented various
    strategies including those for training and recruiting, these
    strategies were not derived from analyses of critical skills and
    competency gaps. Without such analyses, we reported that DOD may not be
    able to design and invest in strategies that will effectively and
    efficiently transition it to it the future workforce it desires and
    needs. While DOD has said that it is analyzing and documenting critical
    skills gaps and that it is actively engaged in developing workforce
    strategies to fill identified skills gaps, we continue to believe that
    our recommendations have merit and that DOD should take steps to
    implement them.

    In January 2006, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
    2006[Footnote 9] directed DOD to develop and submit to the Senate and
    House Armed Services Committees a strategic plan to shape and improve
    the DOD civilian employee workforce. The plan was to include eight
    requirements. These included an assessment of:

    * the critical skills that will be needed in the future DOD civilian
    employee workforce to support national security requirements and
    effectively manage the department over the next decade,

    * the competencies that will be needed in the future DOD civilian
    employee workforce to support national security requirements and
    effectively manage the department over the next decade,

    * the skills of the existing DOD civilian employee workforce,

    * the competencies of the existing DOD civilian employee workforce,

    * the projected trends in that workforce based on expected losses due
    to retirement and other attrition,

    * gaps in the existing or projected DOD civilian employee workforce
    that should be addressed to ensure that the department has continued
    access to the critical skills and competencies to support national
    security requirements and effectively manage the department of the next
    decade.

    Also, as part of its strategic human capital plan, the act directed DOD
    to include a plan of action for developing and shaping the DOD civilian
    employee workforce to address identified gaps in critical skills and
    competencies including specific:

    * recruiting and retention goals, and:

    * strategies for development, training, deploying, compensating, and
    motivating the DOD civilian employee workforce.

    The act further required the Secretary of Defense to submit the plan
    not later than 1 year after enactment of the act, which occurred on
    January 6, 2006. Accordingly, DOD's plan was due on January 6, 2007.
    Thereafter, the act required an annual update of DOD's plan not later
    than March 1 of each year from 2007 through 2010.

    On November 6, 2007--10 months after the due date--DOD submitted its
    plan titled "Department of Defense Civilian Human Capital Strategic
    Plan 2006-2010." [Footnote 10] The plan consists of 19 pages plus an
    additional 13 pages of appendixes that address, among other things, how
    DOD (1) aligns human resource actions with the goals and objectives of
    the 2006 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR)[Footnote 11] report and its
    human capital strategy and (2) addresses the criteria for strategic
    management of human capital, per the President's Management Agenda. DOD
    also submitted its implementation report titled "The Department of
    Defense Human Capital Strategic Plan for Civilian Employees of the
    Department of Defense, Fiscal Year 2006 Implementation Report," which
    is dated July 2007. The report consists of 39 pages that, among other
    things, address (1) its enterprise-wide leadership development programs
    and (2) its challenges to attract and sustain the right talent, along
    with efforts to refresh its identification of mission-critical
    occupations.

    DOD's Civilian Human Capital Strategic Plan Partially Addresses Some,
    but Does Not Address Most, Aspects of the Congressional Reporting
    Requirements:

    DOD's civilian human capital strategic plan partially addresses some,
    but does not address most, aspects of the congressional reporting
    requirements established in the National Defense Authorization Act for
    Fiscal Year 2006. Specifically, DOD's plan includes a list of the
    mission-critical occupations and identifies some workforce strategies.
    However, the plan does not address the majority of the congressional
    reporting requirements.

    DOD's Plan Includes a List of the Current Civilian Workforce Mission-
    Critical Occupations and Identifies Some Workforce Strategies:

    The act required DOD to include an assessment of the skills of the
    current civilian workforce and workforce strategies; instead, DOD's
    plan submitted to the committees included a list of the mission-
    critical occupations needed for the current workforce and identified
    some strategies to address workforce challenges.

    * List of mission-critical occupations. DOD's plan included a list of
    mission-critical occupations needed for the current civilian workforce
    that will be the focus of DOD's future enterprise-wide strategic human
    capital planning efforts. Specifically, the plan identified 25 mission-
    critical occupations.[Footnote 12] However, this list does not
    constitute the required assessment of skills of the existing civilian
    workforce.

    * Workforce strategies. DOD's civilian human capital strategic plan
    also describes various strategies to address workforce challenges. For
    example, DOD has established a Hiring Heroes Program and a Web site
    especially for disabled veterans to help injured servicemembers return
    to productive employment. In fiscal year 2006, DOD hired 37,974
    veterans through this program. In addition, DOD used the Pipeline
    Reemployment Program, which enables employees with job-related injuries
    and illnesses to return to work. According to DOD, by the end of fiscal
    year 2006, this program allowed 358 employees to return to productive
    positions, for potential lifetime cost avoidance for the department of
    approximately $281 million. However, DOD's workforce strategies do not
    appear to comprehensively address the requirement for specific
    strategies for development, training, deploying, compensating, and
    motivating DOD's civilian workforce over the next decade.

    DOD's Plan Does Not Address the Majority of the Congressional Reporting
    Requirements:

    Importantly, DOD's civilian human capital strategic plan also does not
    address the majority--six of eight--of the congressional reporting
    requirements. Specifically, the plan does not include an assessment of
    current mission-critical competencies, projected trends in that
    workforce based on expected losses due to retirement and other
    attrition, future critical skills and competencies needed, gaps between
    the current and future needs, or specific recruiting and retention
    goals, even though these elements are required by the 2006 act.

    * Assessment of current mission-critical competencies and projected
    trends in the current workforce. DOD's plan does not define current
    mission-critical competencies and competency proficiency levels needed
    for each occupation. In addition, the plan does not include an
    assessment of projected trends in the current workforce based on
    expected losses due to retirement and other attrition. The plan, for
    example, does not include trends in current mission-critical
    occupations in terms of current and expected retirement eligibility,
    separations, resignations, and transfers. In our June 2004 report on
    DOD's efforts to develop and implement strategic workforce
    plans,[Footnote 13] we noted that it is essential that organizations
    determine what is available--both the current workforce characteristics
    and future availability. We also noted that this is accomplished by
    assessing the current workforce--defining the number and types of
    competencies for employees in each occupational group; determining the
    skill levels for each competency; and assessing how they will evolve
    over time, factoring in such events as retirements.

    * Assessment of future critical skills and competencies. DOD's civilian
    human capital strategic plan does not include an assessment of the
    critical skills and competencies needed by its future civilian employee
    workforce over the next decade. Contrary to the requirement to cover 10
    years, the plan covers the 4-year period between 2006 and 2010. In our
    June 2004 report, we stated that to build the right workforce to
    achieve strategic goals, it is essential that organizations determine
    the critical workforce characteristics needed in the future. Our review
    of DOD's plan found that the plan recognizes the need to refocus
    civilian force capabilities for the future and acknowledges that the
    department requires a future civilian employee workforce with the
    attributes and capabilities to perform in an environment of uncertainty
    and surprise, execute with a wartime sense of urgency, create tailored
    solutions to multiple complex challenges, build partnerships, shape
    choices, and plan rapidly. The plan, however, does not include
    information about these attributes and capabilities and how they would
    relate to the act's requirement for an assessment of the critical
    skills and competencies needed in the future civilian employee
    workforce over the next decade.

    * Assessment of gaps between current and future critical skills and
    competencies. DOD's civilian human capital strategic plan does not
    include an assessment of gaps between the critical skills and
    competencies currently needed and those needed in the future DOD
    civilian employee workforce. In June 2004, we reported that to build
    the right workforce to achieve strategic goals, it is essential that
    organizations determine the difference between what will be available
    and what will be needed. We noted that this is especially important as
    changes in national security, technology, and other factors alter the
    environment within which DOD operates. As an example, in 2006, we
    reported that the Air Force had identified gaps in its acquisition
    workforce and had begun considering ways to address it; however, they
    had not addressed the gaps at that time.[Footnote 14]

    * Specific recruiting and retention goals. DOD's civilian human capital
    strategic plan does not include specific recruiting and retention goals
    to address gaps in critical skills and competencies. Although Appendix
    D of the plan suggests that DOD does have tracking measures as well as
    quarterly and annual reporting requirements that relate to recruitment
    and retention, the plan submitted to the committees did not include
    specific recruiting and retention goals.

    DOD officials acknowledged that the plan submitted to the committees
    may be incomplete in addressing the requirements of sections 1122(a)
    and (b). Additionally, we note that the plan has information, in
    several places, that relate to the requirements in the act but, in
    these instances, the plan states that these items may be addressed at a
    later time or in other documents. For example, the plan states that the
    department will deploy an automated survey tool to identify competency
    gaps in the human resource community sometime during fiscal year 2007.
    In addition, the plan referred to a separate report[Footnote 15] that
    identified competency requirements for DOD's senior executive
    leadership. This report, however, does not constitute an assessment of
    the existing competencies and those needed in the future and was not
    provided to Congress with DOD's plan, so it cannot be considered as
    meeting the requirements of the mandate. DOD officials further told us
    that other documents not mentioned in the plan may address some of the
    act's requirements. For example, they said that Department of Defense
    Annual Human Capital Management Report for Fiscal Year 2007[Footnote
    16] may also address some of the act's requirements and they provided
    us with this report. Our initial review of the report shows that it
    does contain information on DOD's efforts to align its civilian human
    capital strategy with existing human capital strategies, its mission,
    and the National Military Strategy. For instance, the report addresses
    DOD's efforts to build a civilian senior executive leadership cadre and
    discusses a goal to assess and close current leadership competency
    gaps. However, this effort is ongoing and DOD expects to conduct a
    comprehensive assessment in 2008, which it says will allow the
    department to develop a gap analysis and a subsequent improvement plan.
    Furthermore, while our review determined that the report may address
    some of the requirements in DOD's mandate, the report did not cover the
    time frames Congress directed--that is, the next decade. Moreover,
    since this report was not submitted to the committees, it cannot be
    considered as meeting the requirements of the mandate in section
    1122(a) and (b).

    Conclusions:

    Although DOD has taken some steps, since we issued our 2004 report, to
    develop and implement a civilian human capital strategic plan to
    address its future civilian workforce needs, the plan it submitted to
    the Armed Services Committees does not meet the majority of the
    requirements in the law. This is becoming a long standing issue.
    Without a plan that addresses all of the elements essential to a
    successful workforce plan, such as what gaps exist in skills and
    competencies and what type of recruiting and retention strategies
    should be developed, DOD's future workforce may not possess the
    critical skills and competencies needed. Additionally, Congress will
    not have the information it needs to exercise effective oversight over
    DOD's efforts to hire, develop, and retain the best possible civilian
    workforce for the 21st century challenges.

    Recommendation for Executive Action:

    To ensure that Congress has the necessary information to provide
    effective oversight over DOD's civilian workforce, we are recommending
    that the Secretary of Defense direct the Office of the Under Secretary
    of Defense, Personnel and Readiness, to submit to Congress a civilian
    human capital strategic plan that addresses all of the statutory
    requirements in section 1122 (b) of the National Defense Authorization
    Act for Fiscal Year 2006. This could be included in DOD's next
    submission, which is due in March 2008.

    Agency Comments and Our Evaluation:

    In commenting on a draft of our report, the Deputy Under Secretary of
    Defense for Civilian Personnel Policy disagreed with our
    recommendation. (DOD's comments are reprinted in enclosure I.) However,
    DOD also noted that the department plans to include more "compressive"
    documents in its required March 2008 report to the Armed Services
    Committees. DOD's comments further described several ongoing efforts to
    conduct workforce planning and analysis and it appears that the
    department is planning to take action to improve its management of
    civilian human capital planning. However, these ongoing efforts were
    not submitted to the Armed Services Committees as part of its human
    capital strategic plan and, therefore, do not meet the requirements of
    the law. Accordingly, we continue to believe that our recommendation is
    valid.

    In its written comments, DOD stated that it disagreed with the
    presentation of information as portrayed in our findings. Specifically,
    the department stated that it disagreed with findings presented in our
    draft report. For example, the department noted that it objected to the
    title of our report--stating that it does not truly reflect the
    findings of the report or ongoing efforts within the department.
    Specifically, the department noted that the title seemed inappropriate
    as GAO found that DOD's report to Congress "partially addressed, some
    but not all aspects of the congressional reporting requirements
    established in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
    2006." We acknowledge in the draft report that DOD partially addressed
    some (two aspects of the eight) reporting requirements of the law.
    Since DOD's plan did not address six of the eight requirements, we
    believe that our title, stating that the plan did not address most of
    the statutory requirements, is appropriate. We have refined our
    language in the report to make it clear that DOD did not meet most
    reporting requirements and partially addressed some aspects of two
    requirements.

    Additionally, DOD's comments refer to a number of ongoing human capital
    efforts in the department. Specifically, DOD stated that its response
    to the statutory requirements reflected a centralized enterprise-wide
    perspective that highlighted overarching DOD policy goals, objectives,
    and initiatives--as opposed to providing specific quantitative data
    such as "specific recruiting and retention goals." The department
    further stated that, while GAO found that its submission to Congress
    did not include "an assessment of current mission critical skills and
    competencies, future critical skills and competencies needed, gaps
    between the current and future needs, or specific recruiting and
    retention goals�," evidence of the department's diligent efforts in
    conducting workforce planning and analysis can be found in many
    documents. The department noted that these "many reports" included, but
    were not limited to, its report to the Office of Personnel Management
    (OPM) and the Office of Management and Budget under the President's
    Management Agenda; OPM's Proud-to-Be milestones and benchmarks; DOD's
    Human Capital Management Report, and review processes of internal DOD
    metrics and workforce demographic data. DOD also provided additional
    information regarding some ongoing and planned efforts that the
    military departments and defense agencies were pursuing. The act,
    however, did not require GAO to review DOD's ongoing human capital
    efforts. Instead, the act directed GAO to review the plan submitted to
    the Armed Services Committees and assess how it met the statutory
    requirements. Since these documents and information on DOD's ongoing
    and planned efforts were not submitted to the Committees on Armed
    Services to address the requirements for DOD's plan, as stipulated in
    law, the documents and additional information were outside the scope of
    our review. Moreover, as stated in our report, we did review some of
    DOD's documents and additional information--including the Department of
    Defense Annual Human Capital Management Report for Fiscal Year 2007.
    Our review of this report found that this document did not meet all of
    the requirements specified in the law. For example, as stated in our
    report regarding the skills and competencies for the future, the
    Department of Defense Annual Human Capital Management Report for Fiscal
    Year 2007 did not provide information over a 10-year period, as
    required by the law. Consequently, since these additional documents
    were outside the scope of our review and, in some cases, did not meet
    the requirements of the law, we continue to believe that DOD should
    submit a civilian human capital strategic plan that addresses all of
    the statutory requirements in section 1122 (a) and (b) of the National
    Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006.

    Furthermore, DOD acknowledged in its comments that its assessment of
    the current and future critical skills and competencies were not
    reflected in its submission to the Congress. DOD further stated that
    the department is working with the military departments and defense
    agencies to develop, among other things, common taxonomies, job
    analysis methodologies, competency gap assessment methodologies, and
    reporting requirement strategies. Additionally, DOD commented that the
    department non-concurred with our finding that its workforce strategies
    did not address specific strategies for developing, training,
    deploying, compensating, and motivating civilian workforce for the next
    decade. In our draft report, we acknowledged that DOD included in its
    plan some workforce strategies for development and hiring flexibilities
    to address workforce challenges. However, DOD's plan to Congress did
    not comprehensively discuss these strategies and did not mention the
    majority of the education, training, and recruitment strategies that
    the department described in their comments. In addition, none of the
    workforce strategies discussed in DOD's plans or in DOD's comments
    indicated that they were based on an analysis of critical skills and
    competency gaps. We previously recommended in our 2004 report that DOD
    develop workforce strategies to address identified gaps in skills and
    competences in its civilian workforce. DOD partially concurred with
    this 2004 recommendation stating, among other things, that it used
    existing flexibilities such as retention bonuses and relocation
    allowances. In that report, like this one, we acknowledged that DOD and
    the components had implemented various strategies; however, we stated,
    at that time, these strategies were not derived from analyses of
    critical skills and competency gaps. We further noted that, without
    such analyses, DOD may not be able to design and invest in strategies
    that will effectively and efficiently transition it to the future
    workforce it desires and needs.

    DOD provided three attachments with its comments. First was a copy of
    an internal department memorandum, dated November 16, 2007, regarding
    DOD's development of a competency based strategy for its civilian
    workforce. Second was an Army document identifying two mission critical
    occupations--pharmacists and civil engineers--and current and future
    staffing needs and gap information for these two occupations. Third was
    an analysis of annual attrition trends, DOD wide and for 10 mission
    critical occupation categories. Again, while the information contained
    in these attachments might address some of the statutory requirements,
    none of this information was submitted to Congress with DOD's civilian
    human capital strategic plan.

    Scope and Methodology:

    To determine the extent to which the DOD civilian human capital
    strategic plan addressed the statutory requirements established in
    section 1122 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
    2006, we obtained and reviewed the "Department of Defense Civilian
    Human Capital Strategic Plan 2006-2010" and "DOD's Human Capital
    Strategic Plan for Civilian Employees of the Department of Defense
    Fiscal Year 2006 Implementation Report." We analyzed the content of
    these documents and compared it to the requirements of the 2006 act. We
    also obtained and reviewed the Department of Defense Annual Human
    Capital Management Report for Fiscal Year 2007. In addition, we held
    discussions with officials in the Office of the Under Secretary of
    Defense for Personnel and Readiness, the Office of the Deputy Under
    Secretary of Defense for Civilian Personnel Policy, and the Civilian
    Personnel Management Service.

    We conducted this performance audit from November 2007 through February
    2008 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing
    standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit
    to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable
    basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives.
    We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for
    our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives.

    We are sending copies of this report to the Secretary of Defense; and
    the Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force. We will also make
    copies available to others on request. In addition, the report will be
    available at no charge on the GAO Web site at [hyperlink,
    http://www.gao.gov].

    If you or your staff has any questions on the matters discussed in this
    report, please contact me at (202) 512-3604 or farrellb@gao.gov.
    Contact points for our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public
    Affairs may found on the last page of this letter. GAO staff who made
    key contributions to this report are listed in enclosure II.

    Signed by:

    Brenda S. Farrell:

    Director, Defense Capabilities and Management:

    [End of section]

    Enclosure I: Comments from the Department of Defense:

    Office Of The Under Secretary Of Defense:
    4000 Defense Pentagon:
    Washington. D C. 20301-4000:

    Personnel And Readiness:

    FEB 01 2008:

    Ms. Brenda S. Farrell:
    Director, Defense Capabilities and Management:
    U.S. Government Accountability Office:
    441 G Street, N.W.:
    Washington, DC 20548:

    Dear Ms. Farrell:

    This is the Department of Defense (DoD) response to the U.S. Government
    Accountability Office (GAO) draft report; "The Department of Defense's
    Civilian Human Capital Strategic Plan Does Not Meet Most Statutory
    Requirements," dated January 29, 2008 (GAO Code: GAO-08-439R).

    Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the draft
    report. The Department of Defense disagrees with the recommendation and
    presentation of information as portrayed in your findings. Our response
    to the Congressional reporting requirement reflected a centralized
    enterprise-wide strategic perspective which was called for in the
    report. Implementation of the tactical requirements which support
    workforce planning and analysis is decentralized and conducted by the
    Military Departments and Defense Agencies. In our enclosed response, we
    have provided a synopsis of our centralized initiatives and examples of
    the tactical implementation of those efforts by the Military
    Departments and Defense Agencies. Our plan is to include more
    compressive documents in our required March 2008 report.

    My point of contact regarding this audit is Mr. F. Michael Sena (Audit
    Liaison) who can be reached at (703) 614-9487.

    Sincerely,

    Signed by:

    Patricia S. Bradshaw:
    Civilian Personnel Policy:

    Enclosures:
    As stated:

    GAO Draft Report - Dated January 29, 2008:

    GAO CODE 351148/GAO-08-439R:

    "The Department of Defense's Civilian Human Capital Strategic Plan Does
    Not Meet Most Statutory Requirements"

    Department Of Defense Comments To The Recommendation:

    Recommendation 1: The GAO recommends that the Secretary of Defense
    direct the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense, Personnel and
    Readiness to submit to Congress a revised civilian human capital
    strategic plan that addresses all of the statutory requirements in
    section 1122 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
    2006. (p. 8/GAO Draft Report):

    DOD Response: The Department of Defense non-concurs with the GAO
    findings as presented in their audit. First, we object to the title of
    the GAO draft audit report. We believe that this title does not truly
    reflect the findings of the GAO or the on-going efforts within the
    Department regarding its management of civilian human capital planning.
    Specifically, the title seems inappropriate as the GAO found that our
    report to Congress "partially addressed, some but not all aspects of
    the Congressional reporting requirements established in the National
    Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006." Furthermore, the
    Department is working diligently with the Military Departments and
    Defense Agencies to provide them with the overall DoD policy guidance
    necessary to optimize workforce planning (covering competency
    assessment, skills gap and projected workforce trend analysis), and the
    Department and the Component's are conducting ongoing competency
    assessment analysis.

    Secondly, our response to the reporting requirement reflected a
    centralized enterprise-wide perspective and highlighted overarching DoD
    policy goals, objectives and initiatives - as opposed to providing
    specific quantitative data such as a "specific recruiting and retention
    goals." The underlying document to support our centralized policy
    enterprise-wide perspective is our Civilian Human Capital Strategic
    Plan (CHCSP) 2006-2010. This plan includes our Civilian Human Capital
    Goals and objectives from which we have developed policy initiatives
    which support those goals. Implementation of those initiatives,
    including those which support workforce planning and analysis is
    decentralized and conducted by the Military Departments and Defense
    Agencies. The CHCSP constitutes the Department's comprehensive and
    enterprise-wide plan for ensuring a strong civilian workforce, which is
    able to meet the mission challenges of today and the future.

    The GAO found that our submission to Congress did not include "an
    assessment of current mission critical skills and competencies, future
    critical skills and competencies needed, gaps between the current and
    future needs, or specific recruiting and retention goals�." Evidence of
    the Department's diligent efforts in conducting workforce planning and
    analysis can be found in many documents. These documents include
    reporting requirements such as, but not limited to, reporting to the
    Office of Personnel Management (OPM) and the Office of Management and
    Budget (OMB) under the President's Management Agenda (PMA); OPM Proud-
    to-Be milestones and benchmarks; DoD Human Capital Management Report,
    and review processes of internal DoD metrics and workforce demographic
    data.

    Development, Training, Deploying, Compensating, and Motivating
    Strategies:

    We non-concur with GAO in their finding that our workforce strategies
    do not address specific strategies for the development, training, and
    deploying, compensating, and motivating DoD's civilian workforce for
    the next decade.

    The Department is using a plethora of recruitment and compensation
    programs to meet its talent needs and develop the skills needed for the
    future. These include intern and career development programs, student
    employment programs, recruitment at job fairs with diverse candidates,
    and establishing liaisons with professional organizations to leverage
    their candidate pools. There are numerous Fellowship and Scholarship
    Programs in operation throughout the Department, providing us a
    pipeline for those positions deemed critical. Two such examples are the
    National Security Education Program, through which the Department
    grants scholarships for the study of language and cultures, which are
    especially important to the Department as it conducts its Stability/
    Reconstruction efforts throughout the world; and the SMART Program
    (Science, Mathematics and Research for Transformation), through which
    the Department assists students with tuition in the Science,
    Technology, Engineering and Mathematics arena in return for service,
    ensuring we keep our edge in these most vital of career fields.

    Pipeline/succession planning efforts also include a wide array of
    education and training, and professional development programs, such as:
    the Army Fellows Program, Training-With-Industry, Army Comptrollership
    Program; Graduate Cost Analysis Program; DoD Professional Enhancement
    Program; Logistics and Acquisition Management Program; Logistics
    Executive Development Program and the DoD Professional Enhancement
    Program. This is not an all inclusive list but provides a flavor of the
    type of education and training the Department provides to ensure it has
    the current and future talent it needs.

    The Department is also exploring new recruitment methodologies, such as
    "Boutique Recruiting", which was successfully used to recruit and hire
    large numbers of positions in the medical arena, to include
    pharmacists, one our mission critical occupations. This is in addition
    to the more standard recruitment sources, such as Federal Career
    Interns, and veterans.

    We are also looking at our compensation systems to ensure all needed
    compensation strategies are available to our managers to recruit and
    retain the talent needed. We are in process of developing a new
    "Hybrid" compensation plan for our Doctors and Dentists that will
    leverage the best of Title 5 and Title 38 hiring flexibilities. We also
    pursued with the Office of Personnel Management, and recently obtained,
    authority to offer retention incentives for moves within the Federal
    government for mission critical personnel at BRAC bases. These
    flexibilities are in addition to those currently in use, such as
    student loan repayment; special salary rates; recruitment, retention
    and relocation incentives; and the flexibilities offered by the
    National Security Personnel System (NSPS) compensation system.

    Employee development strategies are also being undertaken. We have
    embarked on a new certificate program for our Human Resources
    practitioners, initially focusing on the development of needed
    compensation strategies, as we evolve, under NSPS, to a more market-
    based system. The Department of the Army has created master training
    plans that identify training, education and development requirements
    that are linked to competencies and competency proficiency levels,
    e.g., intern through professional. The Navy, Air Force and some Defense
    Agencies are also embarking on structured development programs to meet
    their talent needs.

    Assessment of Current/Future Critical Skills and Competencies:

    Although not reflected in our submission to the Congress, the
    Department is diligently working to create a comprehensive competency
    management system methodology that can be used across its enterprise.
    Our immediate workforce planning and analysis efforts are focused on
    identifying, managing and reporting the competency strengths and needs
    of our many components separately via their chain of commands. However,
    we have also embarked on a broader effort to establish DoD-wide
    standards for comprehensive workforce planning and competency
    management. In doing so, we are establishing objectives that can be met
    using alternative approaches that are suitable to our components.

    Under our enterprise-wide competency management system (CMS) model, we
    are working jointly with the Military Departments and Defense Agencies
    to develop common taxonomies, job analysis methodologies, workforce
    planning strategies/tools, competency gap assessment methodologies and
    reporting requirement strategies. Competency assessments, along with
    other workforce planning data, will help set priorities and target
    occupational areas for strategic direction and/or remediation. We are
    building workforce planning data that can be evaluated annually but
    extended to 3 year, 5 year and 10 year projections. We will seek to
    address unforeseen events by utilizing our capacity to adjust resources
    as required and focus on pre-planned events over which we do have
    control. This effort has been formalized by a memorandum from the
    USD(P&R), which can be found at attachment A.

    As we work toward an enterprise-wide approach to competency management,
    the Department also is completing competency analysis efforts both at a
    corporate level, as well as within the Military Department's and
    Defense Agencies. A description of efforts in both these areas follows.

    DoD Human Resources Community:

    A Human Resources competency assessment was conducted in CY07. 1,722
    civilian human resources specialist participated in the assessment. The
    assessment uncovered the following:

    * Labor Relations and Employee Relations, HR Information Systems,
    Legal, Government & Jurisprudence, and Compensation were among the
    lowest scoring of the twelve Technical competencies (below a 3.0 on a
    5.0 scale):

    * Customer Service scored highest among the seven General (soft-skill)
    competencies (above a 4.0 on a 5.0 scale):

    * Greatest participation rates by grade/payband: (Journeyman Level):

    * Greatest participation rates by functional area: Recruitment &
    Placement/Staffing. This technical competency scored above a 3.0 on a
    5.0 scale Department-wide.

    The Department is addressing these competency gaps, beginning with
    Compensation. The Department, in conjunction with World at Work, has
    developed a Strategic Compensation Certification Program, which is a
    future-focused initiative grounded on the critical importance and
    linkage of a strategic compensation philosophy with organizational
    goals, objectives, initiatives, and Human Capital strategy. In
    September 07, DoD graduated its first 100 students in the Compensation
    Program. The next class is scheduled February 2008. The course
    curriculum includes Compensation Fundamentals, Accounting & Finance for
    HR Professionals, Quantitative Methods and Market Pricing-Conducting a
    Competitive Analysis.

    DoD Acquisition Community:

    The Acquisition, Technology and Logistics workforce, which includes
    126,000 members in thirteen functional communities, has embarked on a
    four-phased approach to addressing acquisition competency management:

    * Phase I - Framework Development. In this phase senior experts
    evaluate the existing competencies, establish a baseline, and identify
    subject matter experts for Phase II.

    * Phase II - Model Development. In this phase subject matter experts
    identify key work situations and competencies contributing to
    successful performance. The resulting model is prepared for test and
    evaluation in Phase III.

    * Phase III - Test and Evaluation. A beta test is conducted on the
    model in preparation for an expanded pilot assessment.

    * Phase IV - Assess, Report and Sustain Model. The final model is
    deployed for comprehensive assessments in the community. Results are
    analyzed and reported to functional leadership and other users. At this
    point, information will be available for use in gap analysis, workforce
    development, workforce shaping and other human capital applications.

    The Acquisition Community competency initiative began in October 2006
    and three functional areas have completed Phase III: Contracting, Life
    Cycle Logistics and Program Management. These three communities have
    validated competency models (Phase III). The contracting community has
    started Phase IV. Over 350 subject matter experts participated in the
    competency development process. This process resulted in the
    identification of 8 core competencies, and to date, over 3,600 Phase IV
    individual assessments have been completed. The Phase IV effort is
    scheduled to be completed October 2008 and at that point workforce
    skill gaps will be identified.

    Pharmacists and Civil Engineer:

    Pharmacists and civilian engineers, two of our mission critical
    occupations, were subject to competency gap analysis is FY2007. The
    results of that analysis can be found at attachment B.

    Leadership:

    The Department of Defense provided the web-based Federal Competency
    Assessment Tool - Management (FCAT-M) to members of the Senior
    Executive Service and a random sample of GS-14/15/equivalent managers
    and supervisors throughout the Department from mid-June through July
    2007. FCAT-M consisted of an opportunity for employees to conduct a
    self-assessment of current proficiency and supervisors to rate the
    current proficiency of the employee and the desired proficiency, for
    the position held by the employee. Both employee and supervisor
    participation was voluntary. Assessments were entered by 1,685 current
    DoD leaders and 499 of their supervisors.

    The FCAT-M provides two views of the individual's proficiency (a self
    assessment and a supervisor's assessment). Overall, we found the
    employee's self-rating to be inconsistent with the supervisor's rating.
    This finding is consistent with the recent report by the Merit Systems
    Protection Board on self ratings (Issues of Merit, July 2007). The FCAT-
    M also provides the supervisor's view of the level of proficiency
    needed for the position. The analysis of the results of this assessment
    provides us with the first DoD-wide baseline measure of the proficiency
    level of the current leadership cadre. On average, over 80 percent of
    our current leaders meet or exceed the proficiency levels in leadership
    competencies needed for successful performance on the job. The results
    also pinpointed a number of competencies in which lower scores
    warranted further review and study. Given the significant challenges
    faced by DoD leaders in this period of rapid change, the competencies
    supporting "Leading Change" are likely among the most critical.
    Similarly, as we move more organizations to performance-based
    management and compensation under the National Security Personnel
    System, "Leading People" is another potential area of concentration.

    In addition to providing the first baseline measure of leadership
    proficiency across the Department, the 2007 administration of FCAT-M
    provided a host of Lessons Learned that will be applied to future
    efforts. The Department has gained significant insights into every
    aspect of the process, to include design of the assessment tool,
    communication, contracting, automation support, and others, which will
    lead to a stronger and more viable assessment in 2008.

    Military Department and Defense Agencies Competency Gap & Workforce
    Trend Analysis:

    A significant amount of work is underway within the individual arenas
    of Army, Navy, Air Force and 4TH Estate entities. One aspect of
    decentralized execution is that we encourage creative approaches to
    problem solving and value solutions that address very unique and
    specific differences within our organization. In the spirit of
    leveraging best practices, we have established a multi-faceted
    component work group that links Civilian Personnel Policy and the
    Defense Human Capital Strategic (DHCS) Program Evaluation Office (PEO)
    more directly to component initiatives. The following is a brief
    synopsis of their efforts.

    Army:

    Army's Competency Management System (CMS) was designed to validate
    competency requirements for each position, identify proficiency levels
    of employees in the required competencies, conduct gap analysis, and
    accommodate updates and re-evaluations. CMS is currently validating
    competencies. Army plans on conducting gap assessments in phases for
    544 occupations (328 white collar, 216 blue collar). There is a full
    competency and gap analysis for 157 occupations that is scheduled for
    completion by the end of FY 08. Approximately 75 occupations have
    already been surveyed, with mission critical occupations surveyed
    first. Once the validation is completed, CMS will be used to identify
    competency gaps, share the information through command channels, and
    identify the best strategies for closing the gaps. Army is also in the
    process of researching a number of aspects of the competency area to
    include their potential usage and all of the available tools in the
    context of a broad based Human Capital Strategic Plan.

    Navy:

    To date, 21 Civilian Communities have been established within the Navy
    and all job series have been aligned to those communities. Competencies
    have been validated through an electronic job task analysis survey tool
    (SkillsNet) for nine of the 21 communities with progress being made to
    validation for all. Both validated and un-validated competencies have
    been packaged into career roadmaps and have been published via the
    DONHR website for use in career development. A civilian leadership
    competency model has been developed and published including underlying
    behaviors. Both 1800 and 3600 assessment tools have been launched via
    the website to aid employees in identifying their leadership skill gaps
    for aid in the development progress. Additional skill gap analysis
    tools are in development. Steps are being taken to develop a strategy
    for succession planning utilizing the leadership competency model.

    Air Force:

    Air Force efforts to date have focused on two types of competencies:

    * Institutional - required by all, i.e. leadership, communication,
    leading people:

    * Occupational - related to career field:

    The following is descriptive of their program:

    * Initial focus has been from a corporate perspective with development
    of the Institutional Competencies List (ICL):

    * Eight competencies and 24 sub-competencies have been identified:

    * Applies in varying degrees to all segments of the workforce:

    * Efforts underway to define institutional competency expectations at
    various levels of the workforce:

    * Air Force has multiple on-going efforts involving use of occupational
    competencies in the functional areas and at the MAJCOM level:

    * Ad-hoc efforts and pilot programs are being undertaken:

    Competency efforts in Air Force functional areas and MAJCOMs are
    directly related to a number of AF Mission Critical Occupations.

    The following is a description of program evaluation methodologies that
    are planned or in place:

    * Performed retirement eligibility analysis evaluating trend/timing of
    actual retirements:

    * Next step is to perform analysis of data by career field to determine
    trend, and identify any remedial actions required:

    * A number of career fields (logistics, civil engineers, acquisition,
    and human resource) have identified development templates which
    evaluate combinations of knowledge, skills, abilities, education, and
    experience in order to gauge competency. This is utilized as basis in
    such processes as Development Team (DT) vectoring, selection,
    development, training, etc.

    Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS):

    Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) began focusing its
    attention on competencies and skills more than ten years ago. From the
    development of Career Development Plans to the current Career
    Development Guides (CDGs), DFAS has continually sought to map
    competencies, skills, and development. In 2000, the DFAS Director
    required all employees to have an Individual Development Plan (IDP). In
    2004/2005, DFAS developed an electronic Skills Inventory. Skills were
    identified for most of the competencies included in the CDGs. For many
    skills, two or more micro-skills were identified. The approach that
    DFAS took was to identify all of the skills needed to perform any job
    in DFAS (or at least series with more than 20 incumbents). As a result,
    more than 2700 skills associated with 200+ competencies were
    identified.

    DFAS' Learning and Development Division (LDD) recognizes the need to
    refine, update, and revitalize the current competency management
    content. Objectives include: designing a competency management strategy
    that addresses the skills of tomorrow; completing thorough competency
    models for DFAS critical occupations, and aligning models with efforts
    to support the increase of workforce credentials; updating competency
    tools (i.e. CDG, the Skills Inventory, and eIDP); establishing metrics;
    and developing a communication plan to inform the DFAS population. DFAS
    currently has in place a Skills Inventory that measures over 2700
    skills.

    Defense Information Systems Agency:

    The Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) has established a career
    management guide, and a competency-based systematic approach to
    professional development. Their guide includes career maps for 95% of
    DISA's major career fields. Each career map includes professional,
    technical, and leadership competencies, learning objectives and
    developmental activities at the entry, intermediate and senior
    performance levels. DISA established a forum consisting of senior
    leaders who champion each career field. The forum serves as the overall
    approval authority for promoting professional and personal development
    of the DISA workforce. Additionally, DISA developed training workshops
    for managers and supervisors to communicate importance of improving
    organizational performance by linking competency gaps, individual
    development plans, and performance reviews. Organizational competency
    gaps are filled by executing the training and development programs and
    human resources polices for retention, recruitment, and promotion.

    Defense Logistics Agency (DLA):

    The Capability Management Program in DLA identifies and analyzes skills
    gaps between the required and the current levels of proficiency for
    particular competencies (technical, supervisory or core) associated
    with various job occupations. Competency assessment surveys are
    developed and distributed via the Competency Assessment Management Tool
    in the DLA Learning Management System (DLA LMS).

    In October 2006, a competency assessment of the Information Technology
    Headquarters employees (series 2210) was successfully completed. This
    was a pilot to evaluate the CDP and the Competency Assessment Tool.
    This pilot led to DLA Leadership approval for the CDP and the tool for
    application to mission critical and Enterprise Business System (EBS)
    occupations.

    Since February 2007, the DLA Human Resources Strategic Office has
    partnered with the DLA Acquisition Management Office, Defense
    Acquisition University (DAU) and Director of Defense Procurement and
    Acquisition Policy (DPAP) to assess the DLA contracting workforce
    focused on the 1101 and 1102 series. This aligns not only with the DLA
    Strategic Plan but also with DAU and DPAP efforts to determine what
    competency based capabilities exist and identify any skills gaps across
    the DoD contracting workforce.

    The deployment of the competency assessment survey to the DLA
    contracting workforce began on June 25, 2007. Participation in this
    assessment is mandatory for all DLA contracting employees (non-
    supervisors and supervisors). The assessment survey includes
    contracting, professional (leadership ECQs) and the DLA Enterprise
    Business System competencies. Results are being analyzed and reported
    to the DLA Leadership. The next step is likely to be reviewing training
    events and mapping them to the competencies.

    The DLA supply workforce (series 2003, 2010 and 1910) is scheduled for
    the 1ST and 2ND quarters of FY08. DLA is also looking to assess
    employees in positions that are highlighted as "key leadership
    positions". This assessment would focus on leadership competencies and
    include mapping the development activities to those competencies. Upon
    completion, the information would be recorded into Individual
    Development Plans (IDPs) in the DLA Learning Management System.

    Workforce Trends:

    On page 6 of GAO's draft audit report, it stated that the Department
    plan did not contain "an assessment of the projected trends in the
    current workforce based on expected losses due to retirement and
    attrition." Although not reflected in our enterprise-wide perspective
    submission to Congress, the Department routinely conducts workforce
    analysis and projected trends (see attachment C).

    Conclusion:

    Although the GAO found we did not provide all the documentation to
    support the requirements listed in the NDAA FY06; nevertheless, the
    Department is making significant strides in its human capital
    management. As such, we non-concur with the GAO draft report for the
    reasons provided in our response. We plan to include more compressive
    documents in our required March 2008 report.

    Attachment A:

    Under Secretary Of Defense:
    4000 Defense Pentagon:
    Washington D.C. 20301-4000:

    November 16, 2007:

    Personnel And Readiness:

    Memorandum For Secretaries Of The Military Departments:
    Chairman Of The Joint Chiefs Of Staff:
    Under Secretaries Of Defense:
    Commanders Of The Combatant Commands:
    Assistant Secretaries Of Defense:
    General Counsel Of The Department Of Defense:
    Director, Operational Test And Evaluation:
    Inspector General Of The Department Of Defense:
    Assistants To The Secretary Of Defense:
    Director, Administration And Management:
    Director, Program Analysis And Evaluation:
    Director, Net Assessment:
    Directors Of The Defense Agencies:
    Directors Of The Dod Field Activities:

    Subject: Competency Management and Workforce Planning Information:

    This is to update you on the Departments progress toward implementing a
    competency based strategy for our civilian workforce. This strategy was
    outlined in my Human Capital Strategy (HCS) memorandum of June 6, 2006
    attached).

    In the past, components have independently worked on the development of
    competency based strategies for workforce management purposes. These
    initiatives have addressed a number of different objectives and
    represent a variety of approaches to problem solving. The time is right
    to take the next evolutionary step and focus on establishing a more
    consistent and cohesive definition of a DoD-wide strategy. This focus
    is important for our workforce, both under the General Schedule system
    as well as the National Security Personnel System (NSPS). As we
    continue our transition into NSPS. it becomes even more critical to
    enhance our ability to maximize the utilization of our workforce
    capabilities. Workforce planning and competency based career management
    provide the necessary ingredients to manage Human Capital and meet our
    mission requirements.

    I have designated Ms. Patricia S. Bradshaw. Deputy Under Secretary of
    Defense for Civilian Personnel Policy, and Dr. Carl Dahlman, Defense
    Human Capital Strategy Program Executive Office. to co-lead the effort
    to establish a cohesive DoD-wide direction for workforce planning and
    competency based management. In support of this effort, they have
    established a competency working group with representatives from the
    components to accomplish a number of objectives, including the
    establishment of:

    * Common competency taxonomies where applicable;

    * Job analysis methodologies used for selection, promotion, training
    and compensation programs;

    * Strategies for workforce planning, competency based career
    management, and succession planning;

    * Assessment methodology for tracking and closing competency gaps;

    * Workforce planning and Competency Management tools;

    * Strategies for meeting reporting requirements;

    There will be a number of important milestones established this fiscal
    year that are associated with this initiative. I encourage you to
    coordinate your current competency efforts with the staffs of Defense
    Human Capital Strategy PEO and Civilian Personnel Policy to ensure your
    efforts align with the Department's direction and that, wherever
    possible, best practices can be leveraged.

    Signed by:

    David S. C. Chu:

    Figure: Attachment B: Mission Critical Occupations Data:

    [See PDF for image]

    [End of figure]

    Figure: Attachment C: Annual Attrition Trends: Mission Critical
    Occupations:

    [See PDF for image]

    [End of figure]

    [End of section]

    Enclosure II: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments:

    GAO Contact:

    Brenda S. Farrell, (202) 512-3604 or farrellb@gao.gov:

    Acknowledgments:

    In addition to the individual named above, Marion Gatling, Assistant
    Director; Renee Brown; Sandra Burrell; William Doherty; Cynthia
    Heckmann; Belva Martin; Julia Matta; Brian Pegram; and Terry Richardson
    made key contributions to this report.

    [End of section]

    Related GAO Products:

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

    Human Capital: A Guide for Assessing Strategic Training and Development
    Efforts in the Federal Government. GAO-04-546G. Washington, D.C.:
    March, 2004.

    Human Capital: Key Principles for Effective Strategic Workforce
    Planning. GAO-04-39. Washington, D.C.: December 11, 2003.

    DOD Personnel: Documentation of the Army's Civilian Workforce-Planning
    Model Needed to Enhance Credibility. GAO-03- 1046. Washington, D.C.:
    August 22, 2003.

    Human Capital: A Guide for Assessing Strategic Training and Development
    Efforts in the Federal Government. GAO-03- 893G. Washington, D.C.:
    July, 2003.

    High-Risk Series: Strategic Human Capital Management. GAO-03-120.
    Washington, D.C.: January 2003.

    Acquisition Workforce: Status of Agency Efforts to Address Future
    Needs. GAO-03-55W. Washington, D.C.: December 18, 2002.

    Military Personnel: Oversight Process Needed to Help Maintain Momentum
    of DOD's Strategic Human Capital Planning. GAO-03-237. Washington,
    D.C.: December 5, 2002.

    Managing for Results: Building on the Momentum for Strategic Human
    Capital Reform. GAO-02-528T. Washington, D.C.: March 18, 2002.

    A Model of Strategic Human Capital Management. GAO-02-373SP.
    Washington, D.C.: March 15, 2002.

    Human Capital: Taking Steps to Meet Current and Emerging Human Capital
    Challenges. GAO-01-965T. Washington, D.C.: July 17, 2001.

    Human Capital: Major Human Capital Challenges at the Departments of
    Defense and State. GAO-01-565T. Washington, D.C.: March 29, 2001.

    [End of section]

    Footnotes:

    [1] According to the Office of Personnel Management, competencies are
    an observable, measurable set of skills, knowledge, abilities,
    behaviors, and other characteristics an individual needs to
    successfully perform work roles or occupational functions. Competencies
    are typically required at different levels of proficiency depending on
    the specific work role or occupational function. Competencies can help
    ensure individual and team performance aligns with the organization's
    mission and strategic direction.

    [2] GAO, High-Risk Series: An Update, GAO-07-310 (January 2007). In
    2001, we designated strategic human capital management as a high-risk
    area because of the federal government's long-standing lack of a
    consistent strategic approach to marshaling, managing, and maintaining
    the human capital needed to maximize government performance and ensure
    its accountability. GAO, Exposure Draft: Model of Strategic Human
    Capital Management, GAO-02-373SP (March 15, 2002).

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

    [4] Critical skills are core mission support occupations that are vital
    to the accomplishment of an agency's goals and objectives.

    [5] Pub. L. No. 109-163, � 1122 (2006).

    [6] Section 1122(d) of the act requires an annual report to the
    committees, by March 1, 2007, and annually through 2010 on the progress
    in implementing DOD's plan--which DOD identified as its "Department of
    Defense Civilian Human Capital Strategic Plan 2006-2010."

    [7] Department of Defense Annual Human Capital Management Report for
    Fiscal Year 2007.

    [8] GAO-04-753.

    [9] Pub. L. No. 109-163, � 1122 (2006).

    [10] According to "The Department of Defense Human Capital Strategic
    Plan for Civilian Employees of the Department of Defense Fiscal Year
    2006 Implementation Report," in September 2005, the Department of
    Defense Civilian Human Capital Strategic Plan 2006-2010 was established
    pursuant to Section 1122.

    [11] According to the Department of Defense Civilian Human Capital
    Strategic Plan 2006-2010, the Quadrennial Defense Review Human Capital
    Strategy envisions a DOD framework for occupational planning designed
    to respond to changes in mission, be based on common definitions of
    competencies, and work across all DOD components.

    [12] The mission-critical occupations were general engineering, civil
    engineering, computer engineering, electronics engineering, physical
    scientist, mathematician, computer scientist, physician, nurse,
    pharmacist, security administration, police officers, intelligence,
    foreign affairs, international relations, language specialist,
    financial management, accounting, auditing, budget analysis, logistics
    management, contracting, quality assurance, information technology
    management, and human resource management.

    [13] GAO-04-753.

    [14] GAO, Defense Space Activities: Management Actions Are Needed to
    Better Identify, Track, and Train Air Force Space Personnel, GAO-06-908
    (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 21, 2006).

    [15] Developing 21ST Century Department of Defense Senior Executive
    Service Leaders: Thought Leader Forum, Washington, D.C., April 10,
    2007.

    [16] This report was submitted to the Office of Personnel Management to
    fulfill the requirements for the Human Capital Standards for Success
    under Proud To Be V and the proposed regulations for Subpart B, Title
    5, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 250.

    GAO's 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 [hyperlink, http://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 [hyperlink, http://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: [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm]:
    E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov:
    Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470:

    Congressional Relations:

    Ralph Dawn, Managing Director, dawnr@gao.gov:
    (202) 512-4400:
    U.S. Government Accountability Office:
    441 G Street NW, Room 7125:
    Washington, D.C. 20548:

    Public Affairs:

    Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov:
    (202) 512-4800:
    U.S. Government Accountability Office:
    441 G Street NW, Room 7149:
    Washington, D.C. 20548:

    *** End of document. ***