To sustain a viable military force, the Department of Defense (DOD) depends on recruiting several hundred thousand qualified individuals into the military each year. The service components rely on their recruiters to act with the utmost integrity because even a single incident of wrongdoing on the part of a recruiter--a recruiter irregularity--can adversely affect the service components' ability to recruit qualified individuals. GAO was asked to (1) analyze data on reported cases of recruiter irregularities across the service components, (2) review the extent to which the service components have guidance and procedures to address recruiter irregularities, and (3) review the extent to which the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) has oversight over recruiter irregularities. GAO analyzed the data on recruiter irregularities reported to OSD by the service components; reviewed the service components' recruiter irregularity case files; examined relevant guidance and procedures from the service components; and interviewed service components' recruiting command personnel, recruiters, and OSD officials.

From fiscal year 2006 through 2008, the total number of substantiated cases of recruiter irregularities across the service components represented a small percentage of overall accessions (i.e., number of individuals entering military service), and the service components have taken various actions against the recruiters responsible for these irregularities. Specifically, the number of substantiated cases of recruiter irregularities as a percentage of overall accessions was 0.26 percent in fiscal year 2006, 0.22 percent in fiscal year 2007, and 0.18 percent in fiscal year 2008. The most common types of recruiter irregularity reported involved concealment or falsification of documents or information, sexual misconduct, and quality control measures (e.g., valid parental signatures). The action most commonly applied against recruiters who committed irregularities varied by service component. Removal from recruiting was the most commonly applied action in the Marine Corps while adverse administrative action (e.g., a letter of reprimand in the recruiter's personnel file) was most commonly applied in the Army. All service components have guidance and procedures on addressing recruiter irregularities and have improved oversight over them, but the manner in which data on recruiter irregularities are shared within the service components varied. Although some differences exist, the service components are similar in how they identify, investigate, and adjudicate recruiter irregularities. In addition, the service components have taken steps to identify and prevent recruiter irregularities, including establishing quality control checks to help identify recruiter irregularities and providing training for recruiters to help prevent recruiter irregularities. However, in most service components, not all levels of command have regular access to information on recruiter irregularities that occur. Without regular access to information, commanders may not be able to take full advantage of servicewide recruiter irregularity data and opportunities to learn from their peers. Although OSD has implemented requirements for the service components to regularly report on recruiter irregularities, it does not have complete oversight over the recruiter irregularities that occur. In December 2006, OSD issued a memorandum for the service components on tracking and reporting recruiter irregularities, and the service components have been providing recruiter irregularity data to OSD. However, because some of the reporting requirements lack clarity, the service components do not interpret the reporting requirements in the same way. Further, the data provided to OSD by the National Guard are incomplete and the relevant offices within the National Guard Bureau do not provide appropriate caveats regarding these data, such as including information on the States and Territories that did not submit recruiter irregularity data. Unless OSD clarifies the reporting requirements in its memorandum and directs the service components to provide transparency in the data they report, it will be unable to maintain complete oversight over the extent to which recruiter irregularities are occurring and make determinations on whether corrective action is needed.

Status Legend:

Review Pending-GAO has not yet assessed implementation status.

Open-Actions to satisfy the intent of the recommendation have not been taken or are being planned, or actions that partially satisfy the intent of the recommendation have been taken.

Closed-implemented-Actions that satisfy the intent of the recommendation have been taken.

Closed-not implemented-While the intent of the recommendation has not been satisfied, time or circumstances have rendered the recommendation invalid.

• Review Pending
• Open
• Closed - implemented
• Closed - not implemented

Recommendations for Executive Action

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness to direct the relevant offices within the National Guard Bureau to adjust their reporting procedures in ways that will provide transparency in the data reported to OSD and any limitations on the data.

Agency Affected: Department of Defense

Status: Closed - Implemented

Comments: The office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) reported that GAO findings prompted OSD to proactively and consistently work with the National Guard to identify and address any problems with the data. Additionally, OSD has provided training and assistance to the National Guard Bureau personnel responsible for collecting and consolidating data on recruiter irregularities from States and Territories to help improve the overall quality of the data, according to OSD official. For example, OSD recently assisted the National Guard Bureau with the development of a template with instructions and definitions for States and Territories to consistently and uniformly report their recruiter irregularity data. Such efforts help improve the quality of recruiter irregularity data and enable OSD to receive a complete picture of recruiter irregularities that are occurring.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness to complete and issue the instruction on tracking and reporting data on recruiter irregularities to clarify the requirements for the types of recruiter irregularities to be reported and the placement of recruiter rregularity cases and actions taken into reporting categories.

Agency Affected: Department of Defense

Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) stated that it is completing the instruction for the services on tracking and reporting of data on recruiter irregularities, and expects to issue it in September 2011.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretaries of the Army and Navy to identify mechanisms for the regular sharing of the recruiter irregularity data throughout all levels of command.

Agency Affected: Department of Defense

Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) stated that each of the services share their recruiter irregularity data throughout all levels of command. According to DOD, the Army and the Navy clarified their processes to accomplish the intent identified by GAO. However, an official with the Navy told GAO that while recruiting districts receive recruiter irregularity data pertaining to their district, they do not have information on the recruiter irregularities taking place in other districts. In addition, the Navy does not currently share the data on all recruiter irregularities in a single report. At this time, the Army has not provided information on changes made to their recruiter irregularity reporting. DOD stated that it is currently working on an instruction that will formalize the process by which the services will share their recruiter irregularity data to ensure the widest possible dissemination of these data to the appropriate levels of command and outside agencies.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness to include the appropriate disclosures concerning data limitations in the recruiter irregularity reports that OSD produces on the basis of the National Guard data for the Congress and others.

Agency Affected: Department of Defense

Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) indicated that since the issuance of the GAO-10-254 in January 2010, the Congress has not asked DOD for recruiter irregularity reports. However, DOD indicated that it will provide information on any limitations in the data should the Congress request such a report.