Recommendations for Executive Action

1. Status: Open

   Comments: As of August 2016, the department has taken steps to improve the integration of Business Enterprise Architecture information with other existing information. However, additional steps are needed before this recommendation can be considered implemented. For example, as we reported in July 2015, this integration is to allow the department to identify information such as mapping of existing business systems to individual Business Enterprise Architecture system functions. In addition, officials from the Office of the Deputy Chief Management Officer (DCMO) provided a draft plan for business enterprise architecture federation, which includes steps associated with extending the architecture to all defense components. However, as of August 2016, according to an official from the Office of the DCMO, work continues to be done to address the plan. Further, as of August 2016, the department has yet to demonstrate that this draft plan was finalized and approved. We will continue to monitor the implementation of this recommendation as part of our periodic assessments DOD efforts to manage its defense business systems.

   Recommendation: To effectively implement key components of DOD's business systems modernization program, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Deputy Chief Management Officer to define by when and how the department plans to develop an architecture that would extend to all defense components and include, among other things, (a) information about the specific business systems that support business enterprise architecture (BEA) business activities and related system functions; (b) business capabilities for the Hire-to-Retire and Procure-to-Pay business processes; and (c) sufficient information about business activities to allow for more effective identification of potential overlap and duplication.

   Agency Affected: Department of Defense

2. Status: Open

   Comments: As of August 2016, the Office of the Deputy Chief Management Officer has taken steps to address the intent of our recommendation. For example, according to the department, the transition plan is now incorporated into functional strategies, component organizational execution plans, and data in the DOD Information Technology Portfolio Repository (DITPR), Select and Native Programming Data Input Systems for Information Technology (SNaP-IT), Integrated Business Framework Data Alignment Portal, and the DoD Information Technology Investment Portal. For example, according to the department, the listing of the defense business systems that will be phased out of the defense business systems computing environment within three years after review and certification as legacy systems, together with the schedule for terminating those legacy systems, is generated using queries of DITPR. In addition, according to the department, financial resource needs and milestones for new systems that are expected to be needed to complete the target defense business systems computing environment are identified in DITPR and SNaP-IT. However, the department has not provided current examples of the enterprise transition plan information produced by DITPR and SNAP-IT. We will continue to monitor the progress of this recommendation as part of our periodic assessments department efforts to manage its defense business systems.

   Recommendation: To effectively implement key components of DOD's business systems modernization program, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Deputy Chief Management Officer to define by when and how the enterprise transition plan will include, among other things, (a) milestones, performance measures, and funding plans for all business systems expected to be part of the target architecture and each system's risks or challenges to integration; (b) time-phased end dates associated with terminating legacy systems in phases; (c) a listing of all other defense business systems (including systems that are considered to be core systems) that will be a part of the target defense business systems computing environment and a strategy for making modifications to those systems that will be needed to ensure that they comply with the defense BEA, including time-phased milestones, performance measures, and financial resource needs; and (d) information about how systems are to be sequenced according to, among other things, dependencies among investments.

   Agency Affected: Department of Defense

3. Status: Open

   Comments: As of August 2016, DOD has taken some steps to address the intent of this recommendation. However, more remains to be done to fully address the intent of the recommendation. For example, we reported in July 2015 that the department established performance measures in its functional strategies that addressed at least some of the five attributes called for in DOD guidance. In particular, all of the fiscal year 2015 functional strategies identified examples of quantitative metrics. However, not all functional strategies identified metrics that addressed the other attributes. As of August 2016, this continues to be the case. For example, the fiscal year 2017 human resources management functional strategy that was made available to GAO did not contain performance measures that addressed any of the four attributes outlined in our recommendation. We will continue to monitor the progress of this recommendation as part of our periodic assessments department efforts to manage its defense business systems.

   Recommendation: To effectively implement key components of DOD's business systems modernization program, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Deputy Chief Management Officer to ensure that the functional strategies include all of the critical elements identified in DOD investment management guidance, including performance measures to determine progress toward achieving the goals that incorporate all of the attributes called for in the department's guidance.

   Agency Affected: Department of Defense

4. Status: Open

   Comments: As of August 2016, DOD has taken some steps to address this recommendation. However, more remains to be done to address the intent of this recommendation. For example, as we reported in July 2015, the department's February 2015 investment management guidance identifies four criteria and specifies the associated assessments that are to be conducted when reviewing and evaluating component-level organizational execution plans in order to make a portfolio-based investment decision. The guidance also provides additional details regarding considering return on investment when assessing program costs. In addition, the guidance states that organizational execution plans will be assessed from various perspectives, including progress toward the target environment, business value, cost, and risk. Nevertheless, the guidance does not specify a process for conducting portfolio assessments or call for the use of actual versus expected performance data and predetermined thresholds. In addition, the guidance does not call for documents provided to the Defense Business Council to include critical information for conducting assessments, such as information about system scalability to support additional users or new features in the future and cost in relationship to return on investment. As of August 2016, DOD has not demonstrated that this guidance has been updated to address these missing elements. We will continue to monitor department progress in addressing this recommendation as part of our periodic assessments of DOD efforts to manage its defense business systems.

   Recommendation: To effectively implement key components of DOD's business systems modernization program, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Deputy Chief Management Officer to select and control its mix of investments in a manner that best supports mission needs by (a) documenting a process for evaluating portfolio performance that includes the use of actual versus expected performance data and predetermined thresholds; (b) ensuring that portfolio assessments are conducted in key areas identified in our IT investment management framework: benefits attained; current schedule; accuracy of project reporting; and risks that have been mitigated, eliminated, or accepted to date; and (c) ensuring that the documents provided to the Defense Business Council as part of the investment management process include critical information for conducting all assessments.

   Agency Affected: Department of Defense

5. Status: Open

   Comments: As of August 2016, the department has taken steps to address the intent of this recommendation. However, more remains to be done to more fully address the recommendation. For example, the 2015 Congressional Report on Defense Business Operations included some information consistent with our recommendation. For example, it contained information about weaknesses for systems that were certified with qualifications. In particular, the report stated that the department conditionally approved 29 military department and 30 defense agency requests pending Defense Business Council approval of their problem statements. The report also cited the specific systems that were conditionally approved pending approval of their problem statements. With respect to Business Enterprise Architecture (BEA) validations and Business Process Reengineering (BPE) assertions, the department stated that it has implemented a new process that involves documenting BEA and BPR results in a problem statement early in the requirements process. According to the department, component pre-certification authorities perform the BEA and BPR assessments and every problem statement is reviewed and approved in the investment review board before development and modernization funds can be obligated. However, the department did not indicate how the BEA assertions are to be validated, nor did the department provide documentation to validate that appropriate BPR assertions were completed on all submitted investments. We will continue to follow-up on the execution of the problem statement process as part of our periodic assessments of DOD efforts to manage its defense business systems.

   Recommendation: To effectively implement key components of DOD's business systems modernization program, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Deputy Chief Management Officer to implement and use the BEA and business process reengineering compliance assessments more effectively to support organizational transformation efforts by (a) disclosing relevant information about known weaknesses, such as BEA and business process reengineering compliance weaknesses for systems that were not certified or certified with qualifications in annual reports to Congress; (b) establishing milestones by which selected validations of BEA compliance assertions are to be completed; and (c) ensuring that appropriate business process reengineering assertions have been completed on all investments submitted for the fiscal year 2014 certification reviews prior to the certification of funds.

   Agency Affected: Department of Defense

6. Status: Open

   Comments: : As of August 2016, DOD reports that it has taken some steps to address this recommendation. According to DOD officials, the office has undergone two reorganizational changes, and uses skill inventories, needs assessments, and gap analysis, as part of a strategic approach to human capital planning. In addition, we reported in July 2015 that DOD provided a draft resource allocation plan that identifies staffing profiles for each of the office's directorates and their respective divisions and that these profiles cited needed staff competencies and qualifications. However, DOD has not provided evidence of needs assessments or gap analyses. We will continue to monitor the progress of this recommendation as part of our periodic assessments of DOD efforts to manage its defense business systems.

   Recommendation: To effectively implement key components of DOD's business systems modernization program, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Deputy Chief Management Officer to develop a skills inventory, needs assessment, gap analysis, and plan to address identified gaps as part of a strategic approach to human capital planning for the Office of the Deputy Chief Management Officer.

   Agency Affected: Department of Defense

7. Status: Open

   Comments: As of August 2016, DOD has taken some steps to address the intent of this recommendation, and other aspects of the recommendation have been overcome by events. However, more work is needed to demonstrate that the department has fully addressed the intent of our recommendation. For example, in July 2015, we reported that the department demonstrated that it had completed documentation, such as root cause analyses, assessments of existing interfaces for reuse opportunities, and performance metrics related to the reengineering efforts, and that the documentation was provided as part of the certification and approval process for the Air Force Integrated Personnel and Pay System investment. Further, since we issued the recommendation in 2013, the department has changed its approach to evaluating business process reengineering documentation for its defense business systems. As a result of this change, the department requires different documentation than the documentation required by the process we examined in our report. In particular, the process now involves describing business process reengineering that has been conducted in a problem statement, which is then signed by the functional sponsor and validated by the precertification authority. However, as of August 2016, the department has not provided current documentation to substantiate that its investments are completing the problem statements as intended. We will continue to monitor the implementation of the new problem statement process as part of our periodic assessments of DOD efforts to manage its defense business systems.

   Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should direct the appropriate authority to ensure that complete documentation, such as root cause analyses, assessments of existing interfaces for reuse opportunities, and performance metrics related to the reengineering efforts, is provided as part of the fiscal year 2014 certification and approval process for the Integrated Personnel and Pay System - Army (IPPS-A), Integrated Personnel and Pay System - Navy (IPPS-N), Air Force Integrated Personnel and Pay System (AF-IPPS), and Integrated Electronic Health Record (iEHR) investments.

   Agency Affected: Department of Defense

8. Status: Closed - Implemented

   Comments: As we reported in July 2015, officials from the Office of the Deputy Chief Management Officer demonstrated that the department has addressed the intent of this recommendation. Specifically, while the department did not concur with the recommendation and did not make the recommended determination, it has taken mitigating steps to help ensure compliance with business process reengineering requirements. For example, officials stated that, as part of the fiscal year 2013 certification and approval process, conditions were imposed by the investment review board requiring all components to submit a plan on how core defense business systems would become compliant with the act's business process reengineering requirement. These officials also provided documentation showing that the department tracked these conditions. In addition, the department has reported much higher levels of compliance with the act's business process reengineering requirements in subsequent annual review cycles. For example, in May 2013, we reported that, according to DOD, appropriate business process reengineering had been undertaken on only about 41 percent of the approximately 1,200 systems for the fiscal year 2013 certification reviews. In contrast, officials from the Office of the Deputy Chief Management Officer stated that only 2 systems were certified and approved during the fiscal year 2014 certification and approval cycle and 6 systems were certified and approved during the fiscal year 2015 certification and approval cycle that did not have complete business process reengineering assertions. Moreover, these officials provided justifications for why each of these systems did not have complete business process reengineering assertions.

   Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should direct the appropriate authority to determine whether funds were properly obligated under 10 U.S.C. 2222(a)-(b) for systems for which appropriate business process reengineering assertions were not completed.

   Agency Affected: Department of Defense

Explore the full database of GAO's Open Recommendations »