GAO-11-892, Defense Acquisition Workforce: Better Identification, Development, and Oversight Needed for Personnel Involved in Acquiring Services


This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-11-892 
entitled 'Defense Acquisition Workforce: Better Identification, 
Development, and Oversight Needed for Personnel Involved in Acquiring 
Services' which was released on September 28, 2011. 

This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as 
part of a longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. 
Every attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data 
integrity of the original printed product. Accessibility features, 
such as text descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes 
placed at the end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, 
are provided but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format 
of the printed version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an 
exact electronic replica of the printed version. We welcome your 
feedback. Please E-mail your comments regarding the contents or 
accessibility features of this document to Webmaster@gao.gov. 

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. 

United States Government Accountability Office: 
GAO: 

Report to Congressional Committees: 

September 2011: 

Defense Acquisition Workforce: 

Better Identification, Development, and Oversight Needed for Personnel 
Involved in Acquiring Services: 

GAO-11-892: 

GAO Highlights: 

Highlights of GAO-11-892, a report to congressional committees. 

Why GAO Did This Study: 

In fiscal year 2010, more than half of the $367 billion dollars the 
Department of Defense (DOD) spent on contracts was spent on services. 
Buying services is fundamentally different than buying weapon systems, 
yet most acquisition regulations, policies, processes, and training 
remain structured for acquiring weapon systems. Over the last decade, 
reports from GAO, DOD, and Congress have raised issues about services 
acquisitions and have also highlighted the importance of acquisition 
training. 

GAO previously reported on the training provided to the acquisition 
workforce as defined by the Defense Acquisition Workforce Improvement 
Act (DAWIA). This report addresses personnel working on services 
acquisitions who were outside the DAWIA acquisition workforce—termed 
non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition-related responsibilities—and the 
extent to which (1) DOD knows the composition of this population, (2) 
this population is taking acquisition training, and (3) DOD has 
implemented past recommendations related to this population.
To complete this work, GAO reviewed a nongeneralizable sample of 29 
service contracts, relevant policies, and recommendations from 
previous reports and met with key DOD officials. 

What GAO Found: 

Non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition-related responsibilities 
represented more than half of the 430 personnel involved in the 29 
services acquisition contracts in this review. Several organizations 
have been tracking and managing the DAWIA workforce, but no DOD 
organization has systematically identified non-DAWIA personnel with 
acquisition-related responsibilities, the competencies they need to 
conduct their acquisition duties, or been designated responsibility 
for overseeing this group. DOD is not required to identify these 
personnel and has not established a process to do so. Identifying this 
population is challenging, partly because, as DOD officials noted, it 
is a transient one that is dispersed across many DOD organizations. 
Additionally, these people come from a variety of career fields and 
are often involved in acquisitions as a secondary duty. DOD has taken 
action to identify part of this population and provide them training—-
requirements personnel for major weapon systems-—but has not done this 
for all non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition-related responsibilities. 

Most non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition-related responsibilities in 
GAO’s sample received some acquisition training. The required training 
was varied and limited and applied largely to contracting officer’s 
representatives (CORs) and not to other non-DAWIA personnel such as 
requirements officials, technical assistants, or multifunctional team 
members. For example, the Air Force required two Air Force-specific 
phases of training, while the Navy and Marine Corps policy did not 
specify what training was required. Demand for acquisition training 
courses by non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition-related 
responsibilities has been increasing in the past few years at the 
Defense Acquisition University, but DOD has limited information to 
gauge the current and future demand for training this population in 
the long term or the effectiveness of the current training that is 
available. DOD has taken short-term actions to require training and 
provide resources for some non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition-
related responsibilities. For example, DOD recognized the importance 
of CORs in several memoranda requiring that they be properly trained 
and appointed before contract performance begins on services 
acquisitions. 

DOD has made some progress in implementing the recommendations of 
reports from the Panel on Contracting Integrity and GAO that related 
to management and training of the COR—-a portion of non-DAWIA 
personnel with acquisition-related responsibilities. For example, for 
the four relevant GAO recommendations-—which are related to training, 
assignment, and oversight of the CORs-—DOD fully concurred with all of 
them, has fully implemented three, and is implementing a COR tracking 
system to address the remaining recommendation. The House Armed 
Services Committee and the Defense Science Board issued reports since 
2009 that made recommendations that were relevant to this population 
but were made too recently for GAO to assess their implementation. For 
example, the House Armed Services Committee Panel on Defense 
Acquisition Reform report recommended DOD reform the services 
requirements process in order to address the different set of 
challenges services acquisitions pose compared to the procurement of 
goods. 

What GAO Recommends: 

Among other things, GAO recommends that DOD establish criteria for 
identifying non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition-related 
responsibilities and assess the critical skills needed to perform 
their role in the acquisition process. DOD concurred with the 
recommendations. 

View [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-892] or key 
components. For more information, contact Belva Martin at (202) 512-
4841 or martinb@gao.gov. 

[End of section] 

Contents: 

Letter: 

Background: 

Limited Identification of Non-DAWIA Personnel with Acquisition-related 
Roles and Responsibilities: 

Acquisition Training for Personnel with Acquisition-related 
Responsibilities Is Limited: 

DOD Has Taken Some Steps to Address Previous Recommendations: 

Conclusions: 

Recommendations for Executive Action: 

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation: 

Appendix I: Scope and Methodology: 

Appendix II: Summary of DOD Descriptions of Non-DAWIA Personnel with 
Acquisition-related Responsibilities: 

Appendix III: Acquisition Training Resources Used by Non-DAWIA 
Personnel with Acquisition-related Responsibilities Identified on 29 
Services Acquisition Contracts: 

Appendix IV: Status of Selected Recommendations from 2007-2010 Panel 
on Contracting Integrity Reports: 

Appendix V: Selected GAO Recommendations Related to Non-DAWIA 
Personnel with Acquisition-related Responsibilities: 

Appendix VI: Comments from the Department of Defense: 

Appendix VII: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments: 

Tables: 

Table 1: Participation by Non-DAWIA Personnel in 11 Selected Web-based 
DAU Acquisition Training Courses: 

Table 2: Acquisition Training Resources Used by Non-DAWIA Personnel 
with Acquisition-related Responsibilities Identified on 29 Services 
Acquisition Contracts by Service and Agency: 

Table 3: Service and DLA Participation in DAU Acquisition Training for 
the 29 Selected Services Acquisition Contracts: 

Table 4: Status of Selected Panel on Contracting Integrity 
Recommendations from 2007-2010: 

Table 5: Status of Selected GAO Recommendations Related to Non-DAWIA 
Personnel with Acquisition-related Responsibilities: 

Figures: 

Figure 1: Types of Personnel That May Be Involved Across the Services 
Acquisition Life Cycle: 

Figure 2: Roles of Non-DAWIA Personnel with Acquisition-related 
Responsibilities on 29 Contracts Reviewed: 

Figure 3: Overlapping Roles and Responsibilities of DAWIA Personnel 
and Non-DAWIA Personnel in Support of Services Acquisitions: 

Figure 4: Training Taken by 218 Non-DAWIA Personnel with Acquisition- 
related Responsibilities on 29 Services Acquisition Contracts: 

Abbreviations: 

ACOR: Alternate/Assistant Contracting Officer's Representative: 

AFPEO/CM: Air Force Program Executive Office for Combat and Mission 
Support: 

COR: Contracting Officer's Representative: 

DACM: Director of Acquisition Career Management: 

DAU: Defense Acquisition University: 

DAWIA: Defense Acquisition Workforce Improvement Act: 

DLA: Defense Logistics Agency: 

DOD: Department of Defense: 

DODIG: Department of Defense Inspector General: 

DPAP: Defense Procurement Acquisition Policy: 

FIPT: Functional Integrated Process Team: 

FPDS-NG: Federal Procurement Data System--Next Generation: 

GAO: Government Accountability Office: 

OFPP: Office of Federal Procurement Policy: 

[End of section] 

United States Government Accountability Office: 
Washington, DC 20548: 

September 28, 2011: 

Congressional Committees: 

In fiscal year 2010, more than half of the $367 billion dollars the 
Department of Defense (DOD) spent on contracts were spent on acquiring 
or buying services. DOD services acquisitions can range from aircraft 
maintenance or operations support for a missile range to grass 
cutting, and many things in between. According to the Defense Science 
Board, buying services is fundamentally different than buying weapon 
systems because of the time it generally takes to move from the 
identification of a requirement to contract. For example, the time, 
discipline, and sophistication of a team developing a requirement for 
repetitive building maintenance would be considerably less than a team 
building the requirement for a weapon system such as a combat ship. 
Yet most acquisition regulations, laws, policies, processes, 
standards, training, education, and management structures remain 
largely structured for acquiring weapon systems instead of services. 
Over the last decade, our reports, as well as those from DOD and 
Congress, have raised issues related to services acquisitions, 
including challenges in identifying requirements and ineffective 
coordination between program and contracting officials. The reports 
have linked acquisition training, including training for the 
requirements community--which falls outside the acquisition community--
to successful services acquisitions. 

It takes a wide range of people to execute an acquisition from start 
to finish. The Defense Acquisition Workforce Improvement Act (DAWIA) 
provides a formal definition of those people considered to be included 
in the acquisition workforce.[Footnote 1] DAWIA established 
requirements for the effective management of the acquisition workforce 
through standardized education, experience, and training. In October 
2010, in response to a mandate in the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2010, we reported on training provided by the 
Defense Acquisition University (DAU) to the DAWIA-defined acquisition 
workforce.[Footnotes 2,3] Still, there are personnel outside of DAWIA 
that DOD relies upon to help ensure successful, efficient services 
acquisitions. They have acquisition-related responsibilities, 
particularly as they relate to requirements setting, contractor 
oversight, and auditing for services acquisitions.[Footnote 4] This 
report supplements the 2010 report and is focused on non-DAWIA 
personnel involved with acquiring services. We assessed the extent to 
which (1) DOD knows the composition of the population of non-DAWIA 
personnel with acquisition-related responsibilities, (2) non-DAWIA 
personnel with acquisition-related responsibilities are taking 
acquisition training, and (3) selected recommendations related to non- 
DAWIA personnel with acquisition-related responsibilities from 
previous DOD and GAO reviews have been implemented. We excluded 
contracts and personnel associated with services acquisitions in 
conflict environments or contingencies, as they are the subject of an 
ongoing review by GAO. 

To determine the composition of non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition- 
related responsibilities, we selected a nongeneralizable sample of 29 
service contracts from the Federal Procurement Data System-Next 
Generation (FPDS-NG) that included each military service and the 
Defense Logistics Agency (DLA). The selected contracts were awarded 
and active in fiscal year 2009, were valued at more than $1 million 
each, and did not include work performed in a contingency environment. 
Contracts that were related to major weapon systems acquisitions were 
also excluded. We focused our selection on services acquisitions and 
high-risk, cost-reimbursable contracts. We included at least two 
nonmajor acquisition commands from the Air Force, the Navy, the Army, 
and DLA. For this sample of contracts, we asked DOD contracting and 
program officials associated with each contract to identify the 
personnel with roles and responsibilities related to that acquisition, 
including pre-and postaward responsibilities. 

We also met with key DOD officials--service, agency, contracting, and 
quality assurance personnel coordinators--and reviewed relevant 
policies to understand the status of DOD's efforts to identify non- 
DAWIA personnel with acquisition-related responsibilities and track 
their training. We reviewed guidance to executive branch agencies that 
defines the acquisition workforce to help determine the roles and 
responsibilities of acquisition personnel, including those that may be 
outside of DOD's DAWIA definition. However, we did not review 
executive agencies' efforts to identify, develop, and train its 
acquisition workforce. 

To identify the extent to which non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition- 
related responsibilities are taking acquisition training, we asked DOD 
to identify all personnel with acquisition-related responsibilities 
for each contract in our sample. We relied on DOD officials to specify 
whether the personnel involved in each of the selected contracts were 
DAWIA personnel or non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition-related 
responsibilities. We also asked each military service and DLA to 
specify any acquisition training the personnel they identified had 
received. We compared the reported data on training with training 
records and individual training certificates provided by commands, 
subcommands, centers, and DLA as well as DAU training records. 

To determine the extent to which recommendations from previous reviews 
have been implemented, we identified previous reviews, assessed which 
recommendations were relevant to our population of non-DAWIA personnel 
with acquisition-related responsibilities, and obtained documentation 
from agency officials on the status of DOD's implementation of the 
selected recommendations. 

We conducted this performance audit from June 2010 to September 2011, 
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. See appendix I 
for additional details on our objectives, scope, and methodology. 

Background: 

Congress passed the Defense Acquisition Workforce Improvement Act 
(DAWIA) in 1990 to address issues related to workforce quality, to 
formally establish the acquisition workforce, and to increase its 
professionalism by directing DOD to create certification requirements 
for the acquisition workforce. In response, DOD defined its 
acquisition workforce, which evolved into the 16 career fields and 
paths that currently exist. According to DAU officials, this 
definition is still evolving. For each of the career fields and paths 
that DOD established, there are minimum requirements for education, 
experience, and training under DAWIA. The DAWIA workforce numbered 
133,103 at the end of fiscal year 2009 and 150,566 at the end of March 
2011. In 2010, DOD developed a Defense Acquisition Workforce 
Improvement Strategy to establish a comprehensive acquisition 
workforce analysis and decision-making capability that is still 
ongoing. The workforce analysis is focused on the DAWIA workforce and 
does not cover non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition-related 
responsibilities despite recognition of the important roles they play 
in acquiring services in the federal government. 

The number of personnel and roles on services acquisitions can vary 
greatly. With the exception of DAWIA-certified contracting officers, 
who administer services acquisitions and are involved throughout the 
life cycle of a contract, other professionals do fall outside of 
DAWIA. A model of the services acquisition process is demonstrated in 
figure 1 below along with the roles of personnel who may be involved 
in the various stages throughout the life cycle of services 
acquisitions. 

Figure 1: Types of Personnel That May Be Involved Across the Services 
Acquisition Life Cycle: 

[Refer to PDF for image: illustration] 

Initiate acquisition: 
* Requirements official(s); 
* Program manager; 
* Technical assistant(s). 

Contract award: 
* Contracting officer; 
* Source selection board member; 
* Price analyst. 

Manage and assess contractor performance: 
* Contracting officer; 
* Contracting officer’s representative(s); 
* Military service auditor. 

Source: GAO analysis of DOD data and policy. 

[End of figure] 

Our previous work has identified problems with requirements writing, 
which may be performed by non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition-related 
responsibilities. For example, we previously found that poorly defined 
or changing requirements contributed to increased costs as well as 
services that did not meet the department's needs.[Footnote 5] 
Additionally, we noted problems with insufficient requirements 
provided by customers--non-DAWIA personnel--because of a lack of 
contracting knowledge. We reported in 2006 that contracting officials--
DAWIA personnel--have difficulty preparing requirements documents such 
as a performance-based statement of work without sufficient planning 
and input from customers--generally non-DAWIA personnel--who are 
familiar with what needs to be accomplished.[Footnote 6] The same 
report also found that once requirements are developed, most 
transactions move very quickly into the business arrangement, which 
includes the contract award. Once a requirement has been validated and 
defined, it becomes necessary to develop an appropriate business 
arrangement to meet that need while protecting the government's 
interests. Without a sound requirement, the business arrangement 
defined in the contract could be relegated to buying the wrong service 
the right way. We have also reported that one agency experienced cost 
overruns, schedule delays, or did not otherwise meet performance 
expectations in several service contracts for major, complex 
investments that did not have well-defined requirements, a complete 
set of measurable performance standards, or both.[Footnote 7] 

The Office of Management and Budget's Office of Federal Procurement 
Policy (OFPP) issued guidance in 2005 that built on previous efforts 
to improve the development of the acquisition workforce by defining 
the acquisition workforce more broadly than DOD's definition under 
DAWIA.The OFPP policy applies to all executive agencies, except those 
subject to DAWIA. OFPP's definition includes individuals who perform 
various acquisition functions to support accomplishing an agency's 
mission. At a minimum, the acquisition workforce of a civilian agency 
includes contracting specialists, contracting officers regardless of 
general schedule series, contracting officers' representatives or 
equivalent positions, program and project managers, positions in the 
purchasing series, and any significant acquisition positions 
identified by the agency. Members of the civilian acquisition 
workforce may also include: 

* individuals substantially involved in defining, determining, and 
managing requirements; 

* individuals involved in acquisition planning and strategy; 

* individuals who participate in the contracting process (including 
soliciting, evaluating, and awarding of contracts); 

* individuals who manage the process after the contract is awarded 
(including testing and evaluating; managing, monitoring, and 
evaluating performance on the contract; auditing; and administering 
the contract); 

* individuals involved in property management; 

* individuals who support the business processes of the above listed 
activities (e.g., General Counsel, finance, or other subject matter 
experts); and: 

* individuals who directly manage those involved in any of the above 
activities. 

Limited Identification of Non-DAWIA Personnel with Acquisition-related 
Roles and Responsibilities: 

Non-DAWIA personnel are assigned responsibilities in critical phases 
of the acquisition process, but no DOD organization has systematically 
identified these personnel and the acquisition-related competencies 
they require or been designated the responsibility of overseeing this 
group--as has been done for the personnel who are members of the DAWIA 
workforce. In our sample of 29 service contracts, we determined that 
the number of non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition-related 
responsibilities was substantial. Identifying non-DAWIA personnel with 
acquisition-related responsibilities is challenging, but DOD is 
working to identify a portion of this population--requirements 
personnel for major weapon systems--and provide specific training. 

Number of Non-DAWIA Personnel Serving on Sample Contracts Was 
Substantial: 

DOD identified 218 of the 430 personnel (51 percent) reported to us as 
involved in the 29 contracts in our sample as outside the DAWIA 
workforce. While the absolute number is large, their acquisition- 
related responsibilities are generally part-time, according to DOD 
officials. Nonetheless, their roles and responsibilities touched all 
three phases of the services acquisition life cycle and included 
personnel with such titles as program managers, CORs, requirement 
officials, auditors, and legal advisors. DAU has acknowledged that non-
DAWIA personnel with acquisition-related responsibilities may also 
include technical experts, financial managers, and others whose duties 
may affect or be affected by the acquisition process. According to 
senior DOD officials, DOD policy does not require tracking or training 
for these non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition-related 
responsibilities, but they are assigned responsibilities in critical 
phases of the acquisition process--acquisition planning, contract 
solicitation and award, and contract administration. 

Decisions about the number and type of personnel involved in each 
individual contract are made at the discretion of the organization 
responsible for the contract and may vary widely from contract to 
contract depending on the type of acquisition and the service or 
command. For 23 of the 29 contracts we reviewed, DOD officials 
identified non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition-related 
responsibilities working on the contract. The number of non-DAWIA 
personnel with acquisition-related responsibilities reported in our 
sample ranged from 61 on one Navy contract to none on two different 
DLA contracts. For two similar Air Force contracts involving aircraft 
maintenance, one reported 21 non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition- 
related responsibilities involved in the contract, and the other 
reported 3. According to an Air Force contracting officer, the number 
of CORs associated with a contract can vary depending on the 
experience and skills needed to monitor the work being performed by 
the contractor. Additionally, variation among personnel identified on 
the contracts is also a result of personnel turnover, which may impact 
the overall number of non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition-related 
responsibilities identified on a particular contract. 

Based on our sample of 29 contracts, we identified 12 categories of 
personnel that have acquisition-related roles and responsibilities but 
are not part of the DAWIA workforce. Figure 2 shows the number of non- 
DAWIA personnel with acquisition-related responsibilities in each of 
the 12 categories we identified based on DOD data, titles, and policy. 
See appendix II for a description of the 12 categories and acquisition-
related responsibilities associated with them. In some cases, DOD 
reported personnel as serving in more than one role on the contract. 
For example, a COR was also reported as serving as a program manager-- 
who is the principal technical expert usually most familiar with the 
requirements. In another example, a multifunctional team member--who 
plans and manages services acquisitions throughout the life of the 
requirement--was reported as also being the functional commander, who 
is the senior official of a requirements organization. Figure 2 below 
eliminates the multiple roles as we included the individual in a 
specific role identified in DOD's guidebook, such as a COR, over a 
role within a group, such as a member of a multifunctional team. In 
addition, DOD identified personnel with acquisition-related 
responsibilities who had titles such as technical assistants, 
assistant CORs, and task managers who were not designated as the COR. 
This group along with CORs represented the vast majority of personnel 
on our 29 contracts. 

Figure 2: Roles of Non-DAWIA Personnel with Acquisition-related 
Responsibilities on 29 Contracts Reviewed: 

[Refer to PDF for image: horizontal bar graph] 

Total personnel: 218. 

Role: ACOR[A]/technical assistant/task manager; 
Number of personnel: 92. 

Role: Contracting officer's representative; 
Number of personnel: 49. 

Role: Requirements official; 
Number of personnel: 17. 

Role: Source selection board member; 
Number of personnel: 17. 

Role: Program/project manager; 
Number of personnel: 10. 

Role: Legal advisor; 
Number of personnel: 7. 

Role: Multi-functional team member; 
Number of personnel: 6. 

Role: Other; 
Number of personnel: 6. 

Role: Functional commander; 
Number of personnel: 6. 

Role: Auditor; 
Number of personnel: 3. 

Role: Financial/budget officer; 
Number of personnel: 2. 

Role: Price analyst; 
Number of personnel: 2. 

Role: Small Business Administration advisor; 
Number of personnel: 1. 

Source: GAO analysis of DOD data. 

[A] Alternate/Assistant COR. 

[End of figure] 

We were able to collect data on the non-DAWIA population from 
individual commands and contracting organizations on a contract-by- 
contract basis, but no organization within DOD is responsible for 
identifying, developing, and managing non-DAWIA personnel with 
acquisition-related responsibilities--even though these personnel 
represented over half the people reported as working on the service 
contracts we reviewed. DOD is not required to identify non-DAWIA 
personnel with acquisition-related responsibilities, and senior 
officials stated that DOD has not established criteria or a process to 
do so across the department or among organizations in DOD that have a 
role in helping to manage issues focused on services acquisitions. For 
the DAWIA population, however, organizations within DOD--including 
DAU, the Directors of Acquisition Career Management (DACMs), and the 
Functional Integrated Process Teams (FIPTs)--have integrated tracking 
responsibilities that allow DOD to strategically manage this 
population.[Footnote 8] DAU officials explained that in keeping with 
their mission and priority, they focus their resources on DAWIA 
professionals. 

Identification Is Challenging: 

Officials across DOD, including senior officials at DAU, told us that 
identifying non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition-related 
responsibilities is challenging, in part because these personnel are a 
transient population, they are dispersed throughout many organizations 
within DOD, they come from a variety of career fields, and they are 
often involved in services acquisitions as a secondary and not a 
primary duty. For example, frequent turnover of personnel assigned as 
CORs in some organizations makes identifying and tracking CORs 
challenging. In contrast to a DAWIA-certified contracting officer, who 
is a career acquisition professional involved in acquisition 
responsibilities as a full-time job, a technical expert from a 
requirements organization may be asked to participate in a particular 
acquisition or serve as the COR for a limited time. For example, one 
non-DAWIA Air Force official served as a technical subject matter 
expert who assisted in producing a literature review, writing the 
research proposal, conducting testing and evaluation, and consulting 
with contract personnel on a contract to conduct research on using 
muscle stimulation to help pilots fly with high gravitational forces. 
However, the official's primary duty was as Chief of the Capability 
Gap Analysis Program for his wing in the Air Force. On the same 
contract, another Air Force official's acquisition-related 
responsibilities were to act as the medical monitor to review the 
research proposal to help ensure the safety of the study participants. 
However, this official's primary duty in the Air Force was an active 
duty flight surgeon. 

DOD officials stated that acquisition personnel may serve in both 
DAWIA and non-DAWIA positions at different points in their DOD 
careers, further complicating attempts to identify or track personnel. 
In the 29 contracts we reviewed, we found several examples of 
personnel serving in the same role with the same responsibilities--
such as requirements definition, program management, and contractor 
oversight--some of whom were DAWIA personnel, while others were non-
DAWIA personnel with acquisition-related responsibilities. Figure 3 
depicts our sample of DOD's acquisition workforce and the roles that 
overlap between the DAWIA workforce and non-DAWIA personnel with 
acquisition-related responsibilities. 

Figure 3: Overlapping Roles and Responsibilities of DAWIA Personnel 
and Non-DAWIA Personnel in Support of Services Acquisitions: 

[Refer to PDF for image: illustration] 

Overlapping Roles and Responsibilities of DAWIA Personnel and Non-
DAWIA Personnel: 
Business, cost estimating and financial management officials; 
Requirements officials; 
Multifunctional team; 
Source selection board; 
Program management officials; 
Technical specialists; 
Contracting officer’s representatives; 
Auditors. 

Non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition-related responsibilities: 
Functional commanders; 
Legal advisors; 
Small and disadvantaged business utilization specialists. 

Source: GAO analysis of DOD data. 

[End of figure] 

A group of organizations within DOD led by DAU officials has begun 
identifying non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition-related 
responsibilities for developing requirements in major defense 
acquisition programs and is requiring specific training for them to 
perform their role.[Footnote 9] DOD's focus is on personnel 
responsible for requirements for major weapon systems, and DOD has not 
undertaken a similar effort for all non-DAWIA personnel with roles and 
responsibilities on services acquisitions. As a part of the effort to 
identify the major weapon system personnel, DAU officials said DOD 
identified criteria to define the population--including non-DAWIA 
personnel--who would receive requirements management certification and 
training. 

Acquisition Training for Personnel with Acquisition-related 
Responsibilities Is Limited: 

We found that most non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition-related 
responsibilities on our 29 contracts received some acquisition 
training, even though DOD does not require or track acquisition 
training for 11 of the 12 roles of non-DAWIA personnel--the exception 
being for CORs. The required training was limited and varied, and the 
current training and education programs for acquisitions do not 
address services acquisitions. This is different than for DAWIA-
certified personnel who have minimum requirements for education, 
experience, and training. DAU data suggest that demand for training 
has increased, but DOD has limited metrics to gauge the current size 
and future demand for training of the population in the long term or 
the effectiveness of current training that is available. In the short 
term, however, DOD has taken interim steps to require training and 
provide resources for some non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition-
related responsibilities. 

Most Personnel Took Some Acquisition Training: 

Of the 218 non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition-related 
responsibilities identified in our 29 selected contracts, 170 (78 
percent) reported receiving some acquisition training during or before 
2009. For 7 of the 12 roles of non-DAWIA personnel, half or more of 
the personnel identified in each group indicated they had taken some 
acquisition training. The amount of training varied significantly from 
contract to contract, depending on the organization responsible for 
the contract and the type of services acquisition. In some cases, the 
reported training could not be verified, and we did not assess the 
quality or effectiveness of any training as a component of our work. 
Included in the 218 non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition-related 
responsibilities were 48 personnel who reported that they did not 
receive any acquisition training, such as: 

* 7 officials who were responsible for developing requirements 
documents; 

* 3 functional commanders--senior requirements officials of an 
organization, such as the commanding officer for a missile range; 
[Footnote 10] 

* 1 COR; and: 

* 3 of 10 program managers.[Footnote 11] 

See figure 4 below to see the extent to which non-DAWIA personnel with 
acquisition-related responsibilities on the 29 contracts we reviewed 
took training. 

Figure 4: Training Taken by 218 Non-DAWIA Personnel with Acquisition-
related Responsibilities on 29 Services Acquisition Contracts: 

[Refer to PDF for image: pie-chart] 

Other non-DAWIA personnel with some acquisition training (122): 56.0%; 
Other non-DAWIA personnel with no training (47): 21.6%; 
CORs who received required training (43): 19.7%; 
CORs without required training verified, but have some acquisition 
training (5): 2.3%; 
COR with no training (1): 0.5%. 

Source: GAO analysis of DOD data. 

[End of figure] 

For the only non-DAWIA group required to take acquisition training-- 
CORs--DOD officials provided evidence that 43 of 49 CORs on the 
contracts completed training. For the remaining 6 CORs, the 
contracting organization could not provide evidence of training, but 5 
of the 6 reported taking training. At the time the sampled contracts 
were awarded, DOD policy allowed the services and agencies to decide 
exactly what training should be required for CORs. For example, Air 
Force CORs were required to obtain two phases of training that were 
Air Force specific--including both standardized and contract-specific 
content--for services acquisitions. In contrast, Navy and Marine Corps 
policy required COR training; however, the policies did not identify 
specific training to meet this requirement. On the other hand, Army 
and DLA policy required that CORs take DAU's Web-based training titled 
Contracting Officer's Representative with a Mission Focus. Outside of 
the COR training, the acquisition training that is taken by non-DAWIA 
personnel is not standardized and some was based on the command, 
contract, or on the initiative of the personnel themselves. See 
appendix III for a list of acquisition training that non-DAWIA 
personnel with acquisition-related responsibilities completed for the 
29 service contracts we reviewed. 

In five contracts from DLA, Army, and Navy, there were from 4 to 50 
non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition-related responsibilities for each 
contract who had essentially the same role as the COR. However, they 
had titles such as technical assistants, assistant CORs, and task 
managers. With the exception of the role of task managers, who had 
local requirements for training, the other roles did not require COR 
training or, in some cases, any other acquisition training. 

DOD organizations we reviewed did not require acquisition training for 
senior leadership who were non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition-
related responsibilities, but some offered training. The Air Force 
developed optional 2-hour classroom modules to provide basic 
acquisition knowledge for senior leaders at the functional commander 
level. The Army recently developed a 1.5-day supplemental procurement 
course for senior civilian and military leaders to help them 
understand the Army's procurement system as well as the challenges and 
demands across the system. The Marine Corps provide a General Counsel 
briefing to senior leaders and installation commanders on contracting, 
but according to a Marine Corps official, senior leadership typically 
relies on their attorneys to support them in the acquisition process 
since they do not spend a lot of time doing acquisition-related duties. 

Beyond the training reported for our 29 selected contracts, the 
services and DLA reported offering additional training that was 
available to non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition-related 
responsibilities but not required. For example, one Air Force center 
held periodic training sessions designed for program managers and 
supervisors using in-house knowledge and expertise on different issues 
such as business process improvements, developing evaluation criteria, 
assembling standard requirements packages, and other topics. Officials 
told us they held other training to address problems or to inform 
staff of new policies. In the Army, one command offered five different 
training modules specific to the command that include topics such as 
an acquisition overview, market research, work breakdown structure and 
performance requirement summary, requirements document development, 
and developing quality assurance plans. DLA had a catalog of classroom 
acquisition courses, including best value source selection, a 
contracting overview, DLA simplified acquisition procedures, market 
research and statements of work, and performance-based services 
acquisition. The Marine Corps offer an optional Contracting 101 course 
quarterly for personnel who might have a requirement in the future 
that includes a focus on independent cost estimation. 

The non-DAWIA audit community--composed of representatives from the 
DOD Inspector General (DODIG), the Air Force Audit Agency, the Army 
Audit Agency, and the Naval Audit Service--established an internal 
acquisition certification program for acquisition auditors within each 
of their organizations that audit weapon systems and other major 
acquisition programs. According to the DODIG and the services, the 
auditor training is tracked within each audit agency at the Level I, 
II, and III DAWIA certification equivalents. In addition, the Air 
Force and DODIG have a certification program for contracting auditors, 
who focus on specific contracting issues under their purview. 
According to data provided by the non-DAWIA audit community, for the 
355 auditors responsible for acquisition and contracting, 129 
certifications have been issued among the service audit agencies and 
DODIG. 

DAU Data Indicate That Demand for Acquisition Training Has Increased: 

Based on the number of courses completed, DAU faces growing demand for 
training by non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition-related 
responsibilities, despite few requirements for training. For 11 
selected courses, many of which are recommended by DOD to improve 
requirements development, non-DAWIA training participation increased 
from fiscal year 2008 to 2010, as shown in table 1 below. According to 
DAU officials, DAU does not collect information on why personnel are 
seeking training or what roles and responsibilities they have on 
contracts to determine whether the individuals are working on major 
weapon systems, services acquisitions, or other types of contracts. 

Table 1: Participation by Non-DAWIA Personnel in 11 Selected Web-based 
DAU Acquisition Training Courses: 

Course title: Fundamentals of Systems Acquisition Management (ACQ101); 
Number of Web-based training courses completed by non-DAWIA personnel 
in fiscal years 2008-10: 
2008: 9,245; 
2009: 10,007; 
2010: 10,191. 

Course title: Contracting for the rest of us (CLC011); 
Number of Web-based training courses completed by non-DAWIA personnel 
in fiscal years 2008-10: 
2008: 2,054; 
2009: 5,040; 
2010: 6,365. 

Course title: COR Mission with a Focus (CLC106); 
Number of Web-based training courses completed by non-DAWIA personnel 
in fiscal years 2008-10: 
2008: 12,787; 
2009: 20,807; 
2010: 28,033. 

Course title: Basic Math Tutorial (CLC024); 
Number of Web-based training courses completed by non-DAWIA personnel 
in fiscal years 2008-10: 
2008: 1,054; 
2009: 1,257; 
2010: 1,210. 

Course title: COR Overview (CLC012); 
Number of Web-based training courses completed by non-DAWIA personnel 
in fiscal years 2008-10: 
2008: 1,879; 
2009: 2,356; 
2010: 2,284. 

Course title: Performance Based Services Acquisition (CLC013); 
Number of Web-based training courses completed by non-DAWIA personnel 
in fiscal years 2008-10: 
2008: 1,706; 
2009: 2,138; 
2010: 3,205. 

Course title: Contracting Officer's Representative (CLC222); 
Number of Web-based training courses completed by non-DAWIA personnel 
in fiscal years 2008-10: 
2008: 0; 
2009: 0; 
2010: 227. 

Course title: Overview of Acquisition Ethics (CLM003); 
Number of Web-based training courses completed by non-DAWIA personnel 
in fiscal years 2008-10: 
2008: 13,018; 
2009: 24,027; 
2010: 36,886. 

Course title: Improved Statement of Work (CLM031); 
Number of Web-based training courses completed by non-DAWIA personnel 
in fiscal years 2008-10: 
2008: 333; 
2009: 1,199; 
2010: 1,405. 

Course title: Contracting Overview (CLM024); 
Number of Web-based training courses completed by non-DAWIA personnel 
in fiscal years 2008-10: 
2008: 1,813; 
2009: 4,022; 
2010: 5,438. 

Course title: Core Concepts for Requirements Management (RQM110); 
Number of Web-based training courses completed by non-DAWIA personnel 
in fiscal years 2008-10: 
2008: 376; 
2009: 750; 
2010: 786. 

Total: Number of Web-based training courses completed by non-DAWIA 
personnel in fiscal years 2008-10: 
2008: 44,265; 
2009: 71,603; 
2010: 96,030. 

Source: DAU data. 

[End of table] 

According to DAU records, two of the courses listed above--the 
Overview of Acquisition Ethics and the COR Mission with a Focus--
accounted for over 75 percent of the increase in the number of Web-
based acquisition-related training courses taken by non-DAWIA 
personnel from 2008-2010. The number of non-DAWIA personnel seeking 
acquisition training through DAU is expected to increase with the 
introduction of a contracting officer's representative course in June 
2009 and the Web-based equivalent in August 2010, which is listed 
above in table 1. 

Beyond the insight DAU course data provide, DOD has limited 
information on the demand for and the effectiveness of acquisition 
training for non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition-related 
responsibilities. First, tracking acquisition training for non-DAWIA 
personnel with acquisition-related responsibilities, if it is done at 
all, is typically conducted for COR training and auditors within 
organizations to which these personnel are assigned and is 
decentralized across the department. Second, DAU training 
participants' course evaluations through the middle of July 2011 rated 
COR courses positively in job impact and learning effectiveness, but 
according to a DAU official, these evaluations are completed before 
participants begin their COR duties, and DAU does not currently 
request feedback on the value of a course after the training 
participants have begun their acquisition duties as CORs. DAU 
officials acknowledged that DAU does not have information to assess 
the effectiveness of COR training. They explained that COR training is 
intended to be an introduction to acquisition-related duties and that 
because DAU's mission is to focus on DAWIA professionals and its 
resources are limited, it does not collect more extensive feedback on 
COR courses for personnel that will not likely remain in the 
acquisition community because they are often involved in acquisitions 
as a secondary and not a primary duty. 

Several DOD Initiatives Provide Training and Resources: 

DOD has taken short-term actions to assist non-DAWIA personnel with 
acquisition-related responsibilities to be successful in the role of 
COR for services acquisitions. However, DOD has not identified a plan 
to develop the skills or competencies necessary for other non-DAWIA 
personnel with acquisition-related responsibilities in other roles. In 
2006, 2008, and 2010 DOD recognized the importance of some non-DAWIA 
personnel with acquisition-related responsibilities in several 
memoranda requiring that CORs be properly trained and appointed before 
contract performance begins on a services acquisition to address 
weaknesses in this key function that the DODIG and we identified. In 
2010, DOD developed a COR certification standard that defines minimum 
COR competencies, experience, and training, based on the complexity of 
the requirement and contract performance risk. A DOD Instruction, 
currently in draft form and undergoing review, will give more 
specificity to the COR certification policy but has not been formally 
issued and published. Once this training is implemented across DOD, it 
may only require training for approximately one-fourth of the 
personnel identified as CORs for the contracts we examined. 

DOD and DAU officials stated that the training that is currently 
available through DAU is geared toward weapon systems acquisitions and 
that they do not have a curriculum developed for services acquisitions 
or for non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition-related responsibilities, 
outside of CORs. Recently, DOD and DAU have undertaken initiatives to 
address training for requirements officials. For example, in 2009 DAU 
developed optional Service Acquisition Workshops to assist acquisition 
teams and guide them through the requirements writing process. 
According to DAU officials, key participants who should participate in 
the workshop include the program/project manager, contracting officer, 
and CORs. Both DAWIA and non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition-related 
responsibilities from a specific services acquisition team participate 
in the workshop, writing the requirements together and building 
consensus on their vision and goals for the acquisition. 

To bridge the gaps in skills and abilities of non-DAWIA personnel with 
acquisition-related responsibilities who do not have acquisition 
experience, several organizations across DOD have created a customer 
liaison capability to assist the requiring activity on services 
acquisitions in the absence of a program office to facilitate the 
interaction between the contracting organization and the requiring 
organization. For example, a Marine Corps contracting office official 
said they created a customer liaison group of four DAWIA personnel to 
assist non-DAWIA personnel with the acquisition process, including 
writing requirements. An Army command used the experience and skills 
of a former federal contracting officer to provide technical 
assistance to personnel developing requirements for services 
acquisitions, usually non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition-related 
responsibilities. Within the Army Corp of Engineers, a project manager 
may be assigned to a contract to facilitate the relationship between 
the requirements and contracting organizations. DLA officials said 
that some organizations within DLA have an acquisition assistance 
office to assist in preparing the requirements package. 

DOD has two other ongoing initiatives to track and train a portion of 
the non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition-related responsibilities. 
First, DOD is developing a system to identify and manage CORs that 
will provide a repository for COR training certificates and monthly 
contractor surveillance reports. It will also give contracting 
personnel and requiring activities the means to track and manage COR 
assignments. The system is anticipated to provide DOD with insight 
into the size of the active and inactive COR population within DOD. 
The system is anticipated to be fully implemented during fiscal year 
2012. Second, within the non-DAWIA auditing community in DOD, DOD 
officials said that the DODIG has led a working group, including DAU, 
to find spaces in a specific DAU course through fiscal year 2011 so 
the non-DAWIA auditors can get the equivalent training they need for 
certification based on their current curriculum. In the long term, the 
working group is also meeting to establish an auditor-specific 
curriculum at DAU for the non-DAWIA auditors to receive acquisition 
training to address their specific needs. However, according to the 
DODIG lead for the working group, long-term plans and funding to 
support this training initiative for non-DAWIA auditors are uncertain. 

DOD Has Taken Some Steps to Address Previous Recommendations: 

DOD has made some progress in implementing the outstanding 
recommendations from the Panel on Contacting Integrity, our previous 
reports, and other reports that raised issues related to training for 
non-DAWIA personnel. For the Panel on Contracting Integrity (Panel), 
the recommendations that were relevant to non-DAWIA personnel with 
acquisition-related responsibilities focused on managing, training, 
and certifying CORs. Based on the Panel's 2007, 2008, 2009, and 2010 
reports with recommendations related to CORs and follow-up action by 
the Panel, we determined that DOD has fully implemented 3, partially 
implemented 7, and has not implemented 1 of the 11 recommendations. 
Specifically, in response to the Panel's recommendation that DOD 
develop a certification standard for CORs, DOD developed a 
certification program listing available training resources that meet 
the standard and defining a reasonable time-phased implementation plan 
for the standard. An example of one Panel recommendation that remains 
open is the recommendation to develop an implementation plan for the 
COR certification process. While DOD has issued a policy memorandum 
for the COR certification process, it has not yet issued the DOD 
Instruction that will implement the new certification standard policy. 
See appendix IV for more detailed information on the Panel 
recommendations and their implementation status. 

Our previous work has focused on the roles, responsibilities, and 
training of the professional DAWIA acquisition workforce and how DOD 
manages services acquisitions. This is our first report providing 
insight on non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition-related 
responsibilities on services acquisitions. Recommendations from 
previous reports that are related to our population have focused 
primarily on the role of CORs, which we demonstrate are only a portion 
of a larger group of non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition-related 
responsibilities. DOD has also made progress addressing 
recommendations we made from 2005 to 2009. DOD concurred with the four 
relevant recommendations, has fully implemented three, and has taken 
action on the other. 

* In December 2005, DOD issued a memorandum to address our 
recommendation that surveillance personnel--CORs--are properly trained 
and appointed before contract award. 

* In December 2006, DOD issued a policy memorandum requiring DOD 
components to ensure that the contribution of CORs in assisting in the 
monitoring or administration of contracts is addressed in their 
performance reviews to address our recommendation that DOD develop 
practices to help ensure accountability for personnel carrying out 
surveillance responsibilities. 

* In October 2006, DOD issued an Acquisition Services Policy to 
address our recommendation that DOD's service contract review process 
and associated data collection provide management more visibility over 
contract surveillance. 

* Our November 2009 recommendation that the military departments 
review their procedures to ensure that properly trained surveillance 
personnel have been assigned prior to and throughout a contract's 
period of performance has not been implemented. Ongoing efforts to 
develop a certification system for all DOD CORs should address this 
recommendation. 

See appendix V for a list of our recommendations and additional 
details on the status of implementation. 

Finally, the House Armed Services Committee and the Defense Science 
Board recently issued reports including recommendations related to 
training for those who are responsible for requirements development 
for services acquisitions and non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition-
related responsibilities but the recommendations were made too 
recently for us to assess the status of implementation. For example, 
in March 2010, the House Armed Services Committee Panel on Defense 
Acquisition Reform Report reported that DOD was not ensuring that 
personnel with responsibilities for acquisition outcomes acquire the 
skills, training, and experience needed to properly write, award, and 
oversee performance of services acquisitions, which could pose a 
different set of challenges than those associated with the procurement 
of goods. The report recommended that the department reform the 
requirements process and establish a clear career path for civilians 
in the defense acquisition system. In March 2011, a Defense Science 
Board Task Force report advised that DOD should systematically improve 
training for personnel involved in services acquisitions and oversight. 

Conclusions: 

Non-DAWIA personnel carry responsibilities that are essential to 
getting good outcomes from DOD's services acquisitions. They are 
involved in defining requirements, shaping the acquisition decision- 
making process, and overseeing services acquisitions. While 
identifying these individuals is challenging, without a clear 
understanding of this population, DOD does not have sufficient 
oversight or assurance that the right people with the right skills are 
involved in the critical phases of services acquisitions to ensure 
successful outcomes. Challenges in identifying non-DAWIA personnel 
with acquisition-related responsibilities exist, in part, because the 
personnel are dispersed throughout the department, come from a variety 
of career fields, and are often involved in acquisitions as a 
secondary duty. DOD's efforts to identify and provide acquisition 
training to CORs, a portion of non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition-
related responsibilities, is a good foundation for building a 
strategic and sustainable approach to develop the skills and 
competencies of other non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition-related 
responsibilities. 

This diverse population, because of its differences from DAWIA 
personnel, may require different ways to prepare its members for their 
unique roles and responsibilities in supporting the services 
acquisition process. Yet DOD does not have a deliberate approach to 
identifying non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition-related 
responsibilities or ensuring they have the skill sets, resources, and 
tools they need. Apart from the new training for one of the non-DAWIA 
roles--the CORs--training for non-DAWIA personnel is limited. DOD does 
not have a way of knowing whether the training these people take is 
targeted to critical skills and competencies related to carrying out 
their acquisition responsibilities. Without a departmentwide focus and 
an organization within DOD with designated responsibility for the 
population of non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition-related 
responsibilities--as the professional DAWIA workforce has to provide 
leadership on training, identification, and development of personnel-- 
it is unclear whether these personnel have the training they need to 
help ensure that DOD obtains its desired acquisition outcomes. In the 
area of weapon systems, DOD has taken steps to assure that non-DAWIA 
personnel are getting needed acquisition training. Specifically, DOD 
has identified some requirements positions involved in major weapon 
systems that should receive additional training and built a curriculum 
designed for this group to obtain certification. This is one of 
perhaps several approaches to managing an amorphous and transient 
population within DOD. 

Recommendations for Executive Action: 

To help ensure that training and development efforts for non-DAWIA 
personnel with acquisition-related responsibilities are deliberate and 
contribute to successful services acquisitions--meaning DOD buys the 
right thing, the right way, while getting the desired outcomes--we 
recommend the Secretary of Defense take the following three actions: 

* establish criteria and a time frame for identifying non-DAWIA 
personnel with acquisition-related responsibilities, including 
requirements officials; 

* assess what critical skills non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition- 
related responsibilities might require to perform their role in the 
acquisition process and improve acquisition outcomes; and: 

* designate an organization that has the responsibility to track DOD's 
progress in identifying, developing, and overseeing non-DAWIA 
personnel with acquisition-related responsibilities to help ensure 
they have the skills necessary to perform their acquisition function. 

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation: 

We provided a draft of this report to DOD for comment. In written 
comments, DOD agreed with our recommendations. DOD provided technical 
comments, which we incorporated into the report as appropriate. DOD's 
comments are reprinted in appendix VI. 

We are sending copies of this report to interested congressional 
committees, the Secretary of Defense, and other interested parties. 
The report is also available at no charge on the GAO Web site at 
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. 

If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please 
contact me at (202) 512-4841 or martinb@gao.gov. Contact points for 
our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found 
on the last page of this report. Staff acknowledgments are listed in 
appendix VII. 

Signed by: 

Belva M. Martin: 
Director, Acquisition and Sourcing Management: 

List of Congressional Committees: 

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

The Honorable Daniel Inouye: 
Chairman: 
The Honorable Thad Cochran: 
Ranking Member: 
Subcommittee on Defense: 
Committee on Appropriations: 
United States Senate: 

The Honorable Howard P. McKeon: 
Chairman: 
The Honorable Adam Smith: 
Ranking Member: 
Committee on Armed Services: 
House of Representatives: 

The Honorable C.W. Bill Young: 
Chairman: 
The Honorable Norman D. Dicks: 
Ranking Member: 
Subcommittee on Defense: 
Committee on Appropriations: 
House of Representatives: 

[End of section] 

Appendix I: Scope and Methodology: 

[End of section] 

The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 included a 
provision requiring that GAO report on the Department of Defense's 
(DOD) training for its acquisition and audit workforce.[Footnote 12] 
Our 
October 2010 report addressed training provided by the Defense 
Acquisition University (DAU) to the DAWIA workforce.[Footnote 13] In 
addition to that report, we agreed to review training provided to non-
DAWIA personnel with acquisition-related responsibilities in a 
noncontingency environment. To accomplish this, we assessed the extent 
to which (1) DOD knows the composition of the population of non-DAWIA 
personnel with acquisition-related responsibilities, (2) non-DAWIA 
personnel with acquisition-related responsibilities are taking 
acquisition training, and (3) selected recommendations related to non-
DAWIA personnel with acquisition-related responsibilities from 
previous reviews have been implemented. 

To determine the composition of non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition-
related responsibilities, we selected a nongeneralizable sample of 
contracts from the Federal Procurement Data System-Next Generation 
(FPDS-NG). We selected a total of 29 services acquisition contracts 
from the Air Force, the Army, the Navy, and DLA (10 contracts from the 
Air Force, 8 contracts from Army, 7 contracts from Navy, and 4 
contracts from DLA) that were awarded and active in fiscal year 2009, 
each valued at over $1 million, and focused on high-risk type contracts 
such as cost reimbursable contracts.[Footnote 14] Fiscal year 2009 was 
the most current year with complete data within FPDS-NG when our sample 
was selected. In addition, we selected services acquisition contracts 
that were awarded at nonmajor acquisition commands from the Air Force, 
the Navy/Marines, and the Army. We excluded contracts associated with 
major weapon systems and those that were for services provided in the 
contingency environments of Iraq and Afghanistan. We confirmed specific 
contract information from FPDS-NG with contracting officials who 
administered the 29 contracts selected. We also held interviews with 
contracting officials and personnel involved in the contracts to verify 
the specific service being provided and to enhance specific details not 
provided in FPDS-NG such as where work was being conducted. Through 
these steps, we found FPDS-NG to be reliable for the purposes of this 
report. 

For this sample of contracts, we asked DOD contracting and program 
officials associated with each contract to identify the personnel with 
roles and responsibilities related to that acquisition, including pre-
and postaward responsibilities. We relied on DOD officials to specify 
whether the personnel involved in each of the selected contracts were 
DAWIA-certified, and thus a member of the DAWIA workforce, or were non-
DAWIA personnel with acquisition-related responsibilities. To gather 
more specific information from each organization responsible for the 
contracts in our selected sample, we also interviewed DOD officials, 
DAWIA contracting personnel, requirements officials, and other 
personnel who performed specific roles on the contracts from each of 
the services and DLA. We obtained information about the involvement of 
non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition-related responsibilities in the 
selected contracts, the organizations' training policies when the 
contracts were awarded, and how the individual organizations each 
tracked training for CORs and other non-DAWIA personnel with 
acquisition-related responsibilities. To help determine the roles and 
responsibilities of acquisition personnel, we reviewed guidance to 
executive branch agencies that defines the acquisition workforce, 
including those that may be outside of DOD's DAWIA definition. However, 
we did not review executive agencies' efforts to identify, develop, and 
train its acquisition workforce. To understand DOD's ability to define, 
identify, and track non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition-related 
responsibilities, we interviewed officials from the Defense Acquisition 
University (DAU), Defense Procurement Acquisition Policy (DPAP), each 
of the services' Director of Acquisition Career Management (DACM) 
offices, the Air Force Program Executive Office for Combat and Mission 
Support (AFPEO/CM), the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army for 
Services, the Director for Services Acquisition for the Navy, the 
Functional Integrated Process Team for Program Management, the 
Department of Defense Inspector General (DODIG), the Naval Audit 
Service, the Army Audit Agency, and the Air Force Audit Agency. 

To identify the extent to which non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition-
related responsibilities are taking acquisition training, we asked each 
service and DLA to report any acquisition training that non-DAWIA 
personnel with acquisition-related responsibilities associated with 
our sample had taken and specific training auditors had taken from each 
respective audit agency noted above. We also asked each audit agency 
for aggregate counts of the number of their non-DAWIA auditors who 
worked on contracting and acquisition who had received DAWIA-equivalent 
certification. In order to confirm training taken by the non-DAWIA 
personnel with acquisition-related responsibilities for the contracts 
in our sample we requested DAU training records, training certificates, 
and locally maintained training records. To identify the demand for DAU 
acquisition training by non-DAWIA personnel over time, we requested 
data on 15 classroom and Web-based courses from DAU for fiscal years 
2008 through 2010 that were identified from DOD policy documents as 
training for requirements officials or CORs. We made an effort to only 
include designated non-DAWIA personnel to establish the amount of 
training taken and additionally calculated the number of unique 
individuals by removing duplicate names to provide a more accurate 
number to the demand for training. However, we were not able to 
determine whether individuals worked on major weapon systems, services 
acquisitions, another type of contract, or did not work in acquisition 
at all. To identify the individual courses that non-DAWIA personnel 
with acquisition-related responsibilities took and the sources for 
training on the 29 contracts, we compiled the training identified by 
DOD officials and cross-referenced individuals listed with DAU's 
training database. However, these data sources did not provide us 
enough information to completely verify the training individuals 
identified as non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition-related 
responsibilities have taken. We did not assess the content or the 
effectiveness of the required or available training. Despite some of 
the limitations noted above, we found the data to be reliable for the 
purposes of this report. To understand DOD's ability to strategically 
plan for the training or development of non-DAWIA personnel with 
acquisition-related responsibilities we interviewed officials from 
DAU, DPAP, and the services' DACMs. We also interviewed contracting and 
requirement officials with the Air Force, Army, Navy, and DLA to obtain 
acquisition training and evidence of completed training. We reviewed 
relevant legislation, acquisition policy, and service and agency-
specific policies and guidance, such as the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010, the Federal Acquisition 
Regulation, and the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement 
in order to understand any training requirement for non-DAWIA personnel 
with acquisition-related responsibilities. 

To identify the extent to which recommendations addressing non-DAWIA 
personnel with acquisition-related responsibilities from previous 
reviews have been implemented, such as the Panel on Contracting 
Integrity (Panel), we reviewed 2007-2010 annual updates prepared by DOD 
to address the Panel's recommendations. Specifically, we compared the 
recommended actions from the previous reports with each additional 
report and conducted a comparative analysis of the Panel's status of 
each recommendation with our own assessment. We provided our analysis 
to DPAP officials to review and provide additional information that we 
considered in making our final determination. We also reviewed past GAO 
reports that made recommendations on non-DAWIA personnel with 
acquisition-related responsibilities from 2005-2009 and provided an 
update on the status of DOD's implementation or current work to 
implement past recommendations. We also reviewed more recently issued 
reports by the House Armed Services Committee Panel and the Defense 
Science Board that addressed issues impacting non-DAWIA personnel with 
acquisition-related responsibilities and services acquisitions. 

We conducted this performance audit from June 2010 to September 2011, 
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. 

[End of section] 

Appendix II: Summary of DOD Descriptions of Non-DAWIA Personnel with 
Acquisition-related Responsibilities: 

Based on the guidance and policies issued by DOD and the Air Force as 
well as from information collected on personnel reported in our sample, 
DOD's non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition-related responsibilities 
are a substantial group of DOD civilians and military personnel who 
perform acquisition duties in their current positions or assignments 
and are not members of the DAWIA workforce. Following is a list of 
categories of roles, titles, and a description of the acquisition 
responsibilities for non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition-related 
responsibilities. 

1. Alternate/assistant contracting officer's representative (ACOR)/
technical assistant/task manager: Serves as support to the COR in the 
administration of the contract but does not have the authority to 
provide any technical direction or clarification to the contractor. 

2. Contracting officer's representative (COR): Serves as the onsite 
technical subject matter expert assessing contractor performance 
against contract performance standards and recording and reporting this 
information, including inspecting and accepting supplies and services. 
The COR represents and is nominated by the requiring organization and 
designated by the contracting officer. The personnel responsible for 
developing the requirements may or may not be assigned as the COR on 
services acquisitions. Regardless, DOD guidance states that the COR 
should be identified early in the acquisition cycle and included in 
preaward activities, such as requirements definition/acquisition 
planning and contract formation processes. In our selected contracts, 
CORs were sometimes DAWIA personnel, but the majority of them were not. 
In 17 of 29 contracts, there was more than one COR assigned. 

3. Requirements official: Represents an organization with a need for a 
particular product or service. Requirements officials are responsible 
for technical requirements, for prescribing contract quality 
requirements, and for defining the requirement. According to agency 
officials, acquisition planning activities generally begin when the 
program office, along with requirements officials, identifies a need. 
The program office is primarily responsible for conducting market 
research, defining requirements in a document such as a statement of 
work, developing cost estimates, and developing a written acquisition 
plan, if required. In the 29 contracts we reviewed, there were non-
DAWIA personnel with acquisition-related responsibilities identified 
as requirements officials. 

4. Source selection board member: Evaluates contract proposals against 
requirements and recommends contractors for award. 

5. Program/project manager: Serves as the principal technical expert 
and is usually the most familiar with the requirement and best able to 
identify potential technical trade-offs and determine whether the 
requirement can be met by a commercial solution. In the absence of a 
program office or program/project manager, requirements officials from 
the customer organization serve in a similar role as the program/
project manager. In contrast to major weapon programs, for services 
acquisitions, a program office is not usually established, so the 
contracting organization works directly with the requirements 
organization--which typically consists of non-DAWIA personnel with 
acquisition-related responsibilities in our selected contracts. In our 
selected contracts, DOD does not require a program/project manager to 
be appointed for services acquisitions, and there is no requirement for 
those that are serving in this role for services acquisitions to be 
DAWIA personnel. Of the contracts in our sample, 13 reported having 
program/project managers and 16 did not. Some contracts had more than 
one person serving in a role similar to that of a program/project 
manager. 

6. Legal advisor: Ensures that terms and conditions contemplated are 
consistent with the government's legal rights, duties, and 
responsibilities. Reviews contracting documents and request for 
proposals for legal sufficiency and advises on acquisition strategies 
and contracts. 

7. Multifunctional team member: Plans and manages services acquisitions 
throughout the life of the requirement. The functional experts on the 
team maintain knowledge and provide continuity and stability. The 
duties, expertise, and contributions of each team member are important 
to the success of a services acquisition. Of the 29 contracts we 
reviewed, 24 used multifunctional teams or the equivalent, and 5 did 
not. 

8. Functional commander: Directs or commands the requirements 
organization responsible for the actual performance of a given service. 
Identifies mission-essential services and develops, implements, and 
assists in the execution of services acquisitions. Some 
responsibilities may include developing acquisition strategy and 
overseeing performance and monitoring the service throughout the life 
of the acquisition, including reviewing contractor performance 
documentation on a regular basis to ensure performance is compatible 
with the contract and mission objectives. They are also responsible for 
assigning primary and alternate CORs and assigning functional experts 
to the multifunctional team. DOD officials in this role are generally 
non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition-related responsibilities. 

9. Auditor: Conducts acquisition and contract-related audits at any 
phase in the services acquisition life cycle. Non-DAWIA auditors 
include those in the Army Audit Agency, the Naval Audit Service, the 
Air Force Audit Agency, and the DOD Inspector General. In our selected 
contracts, non-DAWIA audit personnel do not have and are not required 
to receive DAWIA certification. 

10. Financial/budget officer: Serves as an advisor for fiscal and 
budgetary issues. 

11. Price analyst: Analyzes and evaluates financial and cost-based data 
for reasonableness, completeness, accuracy, and affordability at 
initiation or contract award phases of services acquisitions. 

12. Small Business Administration advisor: Serves as the principal 
advisor and advocate for small business issues. 

[End of section] 

Appendix III: Acquisition Training Resources Used by Non-DAWIA 
Personnel with Acquisition-related Responsibilities Identified on 29 
Services Acquisition Contracts: 

Table 2: Acquisition Training Resources Used by Non-DAWIA Personnel 
with Acquisition-related Responsibilities Identified on 29 Services 
Acquisition Contracts by Service and Agency: 

Air Force: 10 Contracts; 

Source: Air Force; 
Training: Phase I & II COR Training. 

Source: Air Force; 
Training: Phase III COR Training. 

Source: Air Force; 
Training: Functional Commander Training. 

Source: Air Force; 
Training: Source Selection/Ethics Training. 

Source: Air Force Institute of Technology; 
Training: FAM 103 - Air Force Fundamentals of Acquisition Management. 

Source: Contractor; 
Training: Source Selection. 

Source: Unspecified; 
Training: Administration of Cost Contracts. 

Source: Unspecified; 
Training: Acquisition Actions Course for Competitive Sourcing. 

Army: 8 contracts; 

Source: Air Force; 
Training: Fiscal Law Tutorial. 

Source: Army/Mobile District; 
Training: Contracting Overview. 

Source: Communication-Electronics Command (CECOM) Contracting Policy 
Office; 
Training: COR Locality/Theater/Mission Specific Training. 

Source: Contractor; 
Training: Fiscal Law. 

Source: Contractor; 
Training: ACOR Training. 

Source: DOD; 
Training: Government Contract Law. 

Source: DOD; 
Training: CON106 - Construction Contract Pricing. 

Source: Unspecified; 
Training: Appropriations Law. 

Source: Unspecified; 
Training: Contracting Fundamental Course. 

Source: Unspecified; 
Training: Wide Area Work Flow Training. 

Source: Unspecified; 
Training: COR Training. 

Source: US Army Corps of Engineers; 
Training: Administration of O&M Contracts. 

Source: US Army Corps of Engineers; 
Training: Advanced Administration of O&M Contracts. 

Source: US Army Corps of Engineers; 
Training: Estimating for Construction Modifications. 

Source: US Army Corps of Engineers; 
Training: Operations Management. 

Source: US Army Corps of Engineers; 
Training: Specification Writing for Construction Contracts. 

Source: US Army Corps of Engineers; 
Training: Construction Contract Negotiation. 

Source: US Army Corps of Engineers; 
Training: Operations Management Workshop. 

Source: US Army Logistics University; 
Training: COR Course. 

Source: US Army Logistics Management College; 
Training: Performance Work Statement. 

Source: USDA Graduate School; 
Training: Comprehensive COTR Workshop. 

Navy/Marines: 7 contracts; 

Source: Contractor; 
Training: COR222 equivalent. 

Source: USDA Graduate School; 
Training: Comprehensive COTR Workshop. 

Source: Unspecified; 
Training: Service Acquisition Workshop. 

Source: Unspecified; 
Training: Evaluating a Contractor's Performance. 

Source: Unspecified; 
Training: Government Procurement Law. 

Source: Unspecified; 
Training: Federal Acquisition Regulation Boot camp. 

Source: Unspecified; 
Training: Task Manager Training. 

Source: Unspecified; 
Training: On the Job Training. 

Source: Unspecified; 
Training: COR Training. 

DLA: 4 contracts; 

Source: Army Judge Advocate General School; 
Contract Attorney's Course 5F-F10. 

Source: DLA; 
Training: COR Training. 

Source: Unspecified; 
Training: Quality Management System Training. 

Source: GAO analysis of DOD data. 

[End of table] 

Table 3: Service and DLA Participation in DAU Acquisition Training for 
the 29 Selected Services Acquisition Contracts: 

DAU course: ACQ101; 
Course description: Fundamentals of Systems Acquisition Management; 
Air Force: [Check]; 
Army: [Check]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: ACQ201A; 
Course description: Intermediate Systems Acquisition, Part A; 
Air Force: [Check]; 
Army: [Check]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: ACQ201B; 
Course description: Intermediate Systems Acquisition, Part B; 
Air Force: [Check]; 
Army: [Check]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: BCF103; 
Course description: Fundamentals of Business Financial Management; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Empty]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLB007; 
Course description: Cost Analysis; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Check]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLB009; 
Course description: Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution 
and Budget Exhibits; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Empty]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLB016; 
Course description: Introduction to Earned Value Management; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Empty]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLB020; 
Course description: Baseline Maintenance; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Check]; 
Navy/Marines: [Empty]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLC004; 
Course description: Market Research; 
Air Force: [Check]; 
Army: [Check]; 
Navy/Marines: [Empty]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLC007; 
Course description: Contract Source Selection; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Check]; 
Navy/Marines: [Empty]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLC011; 
Course description: Contracting for the rest of us; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Check]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLC013; 
Course description: Performance-Based Services Acquisition; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Check]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLC016; 
Course description: Implementing Price Based Acquisition; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Check]; 
Navy/Marines: [Empty]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLC027; 
Course description: Buy American Act; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Empty]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLC033; 
Course description: Contract Format and Structure for DOD e-Business 
Environment; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Check]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLC046; 
Course description: Green Procurement; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Empty]; 
Navy/Marines: [Empty]; 
DLA: [Check]. 

DAU course: CLC047; 
Course description: Contract Negotiation Techniques; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Check]; 
Navy/Marines: [Empty]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLC050; 
Course description: Contracting with Canada; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Check]; 
Navy/Marines: [Empty]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLC060; 
Course description: Time and Materials Contracts; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Check]; 
Navy/Marines: [Empty]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLC106; 
Course description: Contracting Officer's Representative with a 
Mission Focus; 
Air Force: [Check]; 
Army: [Check]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLC107; 
Course description: OPSEC Contract Requirements; 
Air Force: [Check]; 
Army: [Empty]; 
Navy/Marines: [Empty]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLC114; 
Course description: Contingency Contracting Officer Refresher; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Check]; 
Navy/Marines: [Empty]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLC125; 
Course description: Berry Amendment; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Check]; 
Navy/Marines: [Empty]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLC206; 
Course description: Contracting Officer's Representative in a 
Contingency 
Environment; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Check]; 
Navy/Marines: [Empty]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLC222; 
Course description: Contracting Officer's Representative Online 
Training; 
Air Force: [Check]; 
Army: [Empty]; 
Navy/Marines: [Empty]; 
DLA: [Check]. 

DAU course: CLE001; 
Course description: Value Engineering; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Empty]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLE003; 
Course description: Technical Reviews; 
Air Force: [Check]; 
Army: [Empty]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLE008; 
Course description: Six Sigma: Concepts and Processes; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Empty]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLE011; 
Course description: Modeling and Simulation for Systems Engineering; 
Air Force: [Check]; 
Army: [Empty]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLE016; 
Course description: Outcome-Based Performance Measures; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Empty]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLE021; 
Course description: Technology Readiness Assessments; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Empty]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLE023; 
Course description: Modeling and Simulation for Test and Evaluation; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Empty]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLE025; 
Course description: Information Assurance for Acquisition 
Professionals; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Empty]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLE029; 
Course description: Testing In a Joint Environment; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Empty]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLE201; 
Course description: ISO 9000:2000; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Empty]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLG001; 
Course description: DOD Government Purchase Card; 
Air Force: [Check]; 
Army: [Check]; 
Navy/Marines: [Empty]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLG004; 
Course description: DOD Government Purchase Card Refresher Training; 
Air Force: [Check]; 
Army: [Check]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLG005; 
Course description: Purchase Card Online System; 
Air Force: [Check]; 
Army: [Empty]; 
Navy/Marines: [Empty]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLL002; 
Course description: Defense Logistics Agency Support to the PM; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Check]; 
Navy/Marines: [Empty]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLL006; 
Course description: Depot Maintenance Partnering; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Check]; 
Navy/Marines: [Empty]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLL008; 
Course description: Designing for Supportability in DOD Systems; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Check]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLL011; 
Course description: Performance-Based Logistics; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Check]; 
Navy/Marines: [Empty]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLL020; 
Course description: Independent Logistics Assessments; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Check]; 
Navy/Marines: [Empty]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLL034; 
Course description: SLAMIS; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Check]; 
Navy/Marines: [Empty]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLM003; 
Course description: Overview of Acquisition Ethics; 
Air Force: [Check]; 
Army: [Check]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Check]. 

DAU course: CLM014; 
Course description: IPT Management and Leadership; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Empty]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLM016; 
Course description: Cost Estimating; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Empty]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLM017; 
Course description: Risk Management; 
Air Force: [Check]; 
Army: [Empty]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLM021; 
Course description: Introduction to Reducing Total Ownership Costs; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Empty]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLM024; 
Course description: Contracting Overview; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Check]; 
Navy/Marines: [Empty]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLM029; 
Course description: Net-Ready Key Performance Parameter; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Empty]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLM031; 
Course description: Improved Statement of Work; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Empty]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLM032; 
Course description: Evolutionary Acquisition; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Check]; 
Navy/Marines: [Empty]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLM038; 
Course description: Corrosion Prevention and Control Overview; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Check]; 
Navy/Marines: [Empty]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLM039; 
Course description: Foundations of Government Property; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Check]; 
Navy/Marines: [Empty]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLM041; 
Course description: Capabilities-Based Planning; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Check]; 
Navy/Marines: [Empty]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CLM049; 
Course description: Procurement Fraud Indicators; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Empty]; 
Navy/Marines: [Empty]; 
DLA: [Check]. 

DAU course: CLM200; 
Course description: Item-Unique Identification; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Check]; 
Navy/Marines: [Empty]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CON100; 
Course description: Shaping Smart Business Arrangements; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Empty]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CON101; 
Course description: Basics of Contracting; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Empty]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CON110; 
Course description: Mission-Support Planning; 
Air Force: [Check]; 
Army: [Empty]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CON111; 
Course description: Mission Strategy Execution; 
Air Force: [Check]; 
Army: [Empty]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CON112; 
Course description: Mission-Performance Assessment; 
Air Force: [Check]; 
Army: [Empty]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CON120; 
Course description: Mission-Focused Contracting; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Empty]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Check]. 

DAU course: CON214; 
Course description: Business Decisions for Contracting; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Empty]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CON215; 
Course description: Intermediate Contracting for Mission Support; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Empty]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CON216; 
Course description: Legal Considerations in Contracting; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Empty]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CON217; 
Course description: Cost Analysis and Negotiation Techniques; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Empty]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CON218; 
Course description: Advanced Contracting for Mission Support; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Empty]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CON234; 
Course description: Joint Contingency Contracting; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Empty]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: CON237; 
Course description: Simplified Acquisition Procedures; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Check]; 
Navy/Marines: [Empty]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: FE201; 
Course description: Intermediate Facilities Engineering; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Empty]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: HBS224; 
Course description: Writing Skills; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Empty]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: IRM101; 
Course description: Basic Information Systems Acquisition; 
Air Force: [Check]; 
Army: [Empty]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: LOG101; 
Course description: Acquisition Logistics Fundamentals; 
Air Force: [Check]; 
Army: [Check]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: LOG102; 
Course description: Fundamentals of System Sustainment Management; 
Air Force: [Check]; 
Army: [Check]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: PMT251; 
Course description: Program Management Tools Course, Part I; 
Air Force: [Check]; 
Army: [Empty]; 
Navy/Marines: [Empty]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: PQM101; 
Course description: Production, Quality, and Manufacturing 
Fundamentals; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Check]; 
Navy/Marines: [Empty]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: PQM201A; 
Course description: Intermediate Production, Quality & Manufacturing; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Check]; 
Navy/Marines: [Empty]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: SAM101; 
Course description: Basic Software Acquisition Management; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Empty]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: SPS104; 
Course description: Report Writing; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Check]; 
Navy/Marines: [Empty]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: SYS101; 
Course description: Fundamentals of Systems Planning, Research, 
Development, and Engineering; 
Air Force: [Check]; 
Army: [Empty]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: SYS202; 
Course description: Intermediate Systems Planning, Research, 
Development, and Engineering, Part I; 
Air Force: [Check]; 
Army: [Empty]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: SYS203; 
Course description: Intermediate Systems Planning, Research, 
Development, and Engineering, Part II; 
Air Force: [Check]; 
Army: [Empty]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: TST101; 
Course description: Introduction to Acquisition Workforce Test and 
Evaluation; 
Air Force: [Empty]; 
Army: [Check]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

DAU course: TST102; 
Course description: Fundamentals of Test and Evaluation; 
Air Force: [Check]; 
Army: [Empty]; 
Navy/Marines: [Check]; 
DLA: [Empty]. 

[End of table] 

Source: GAO analysis of DOD data. 

[End of section] 

Appendix IV: Status of Selected Recommendations from 2007-2010 Panel on 
Contracting Integrity Reports: 

To determine the extent to which training recommendations from the 
Panel on Contracting Integrity (Panel) have been implemented, we 
examined whether DOD had implemented the Panel's recommendations in 
2007, 2008, and 2009 by reviewing the 2007, 2008, 2009, and 2010 
reports. To assess the implementation of the 2010 recommendations, DPAP 
provided information on the status of the recommendations. 
Specifically, we compared the recommended actions from the 2007 report 
with the reported action in the 2008 report. The same comparative 
analysis was conducted using the recommended actions from 2008, 2009, 
and 2010 reports. We differentiated between recommendations that 
specifically mention training from those that did not, as well as 
recommendations in which training was involved in the implementation of 
the recommendation. We analyzed the supporting documents to assess the 
status, and, based on our review, we assigned one of the following four 
status assessments to each of the recommendations: 

1. Fully Implemented. The entire wording of the action item has been 
fulfilled. 

2. Partially Implemented. Only a portion of the action has been 
implemented. When the wording of the action item had multiple parts, if 
one part or a portion of a part had been implemented (but not all 
parts), we categorized the action item as "partially implemented." 

3. Not Implemented-Action Taken. No part of the action item has been 
implemented, but steps have been taken toward the completion of the 
action item. For example, if legislation had been introduced to address 
the action but had not been enacted into law, we categorized the action 
item as "not implemented-action taken." 

4. Not Implemented-No Action. No part of the action item has been 
completed, and no action has been taken to address the action item. For 
example, if the action item called for changes in legislation but no 
legislation has even been proposed, we categorized the action item as 
"not implemented-no action." 

Table 4: Status of Selected Panel on Contracting Integrity 
Recommendations from 2007-2010: 

2010 Recommendations: 

1. Publish DOD COR Handbook; 
DOD reported actions: The DOD-wide COR Handbook is currently in draft 
form and is being revised and updated; 
Panel assessment of implementation status: Ongoing[A]; 
GAO assessment of implementation status: Partially implemented. 

2. Develop guidance to institutionalize "Combating Trafficking in 
Persons" in quality assurance surveillance plans; 
DOD reported actions: DOD has drafted guidance in the form of a 
"Trafficking in Persons" pamphlet; 
Panel assessment of implementation status: Ongoing[A]; 
GAO assessment of implementation status: Partially implemented. 

3. Review and recommend changes to regulations to improve contract 
surveillance; 
DOD reported actions: On behalf of the Panel on Contracting Integrity, 
a working group focused on sufficient contracting surveillance is 
reviewing acquisition regulations and information to develop 
recommendations and changes to formalize the role of the COR and other 
officials executing contract surveillance; 
Panel assessment of implementation status: Ongoing[A]; 
GAO assessment of implementation status: Not implemented--action taken. 

2009 Recommendations: 

4. Develop a DOD Instruction for COR standards and certification; 
DOD reported actions: The draft DOD Instruction was approved by the 
Panel's senior leaders, but as of July 2011, it had not been finalized 
and issued; 
Panel assessment of implementation status: Ongoing; 
GAO assessment of implementation status: Partially implemented. 

5. Develop a COR handbook; 
DOD reported actions: 
The DOD Contingency COR Handbook was formally published in August 2010 
and as of July 2011, the DOD-wide COR Handbook is waiting for review 
and coordination before it will be finalized and published; 
Panel assessment of implementation status: Ongoing; 
GAO assessment of implementation status: Partially implemented. 

2008 Recommendations: 

6. Develop a COR certification process; 
DOD reported actions: DOD issued a memorandum on March 29, 2010, 
entitled "DOD Standard for Certification of Contracting Officer's 
Representatives (COR) for Service Acquisitions" which identified a DOD 
COR certification standard by defining minimum COR competencies, 
experience, and training based on the complexity of the requirement and 
contract performance risk. DOD noted the memorandum is not a directive-
type memo and the certification process will not be established until 
the DOD Instruction is published; 
Panel assessment of implementation status: Ongoing; 
GAO assessment of implementation status: Partially implemented. 

7. Develop an implementation plan for the COR certification process; 
DOD reported actions: DOD reported that the action is ongoing and that 
the draft DOD Instruction constitutes the implementation of the 
certification program. DOD is in the process of editing and conducting 
formal Office of the Secretary of Defense coordination to finalize the 
DOD Instruction; 
Panel assessment of implementation status: Ongoing; 
GAO assessment of implementation status: Partially implemented. 

8. Have DAU, with support from DOD components, evaluate current COR 
training (government and commercial); 
DOD reported actions: DAU has taken actions to evaluate COR training 
and has developed new COR training courses. DAU has taken the lead on 
advising commercial offerors, as well as other government agencies, on 
course equivalency requirements; 
Panel assessment of implementation status: Ongoing; 
GAO assessment of implementation status: Partially implemented. 

2007 Recommendations: 

9. Develop certification standard for CORs; 
DOD reported actions: A DOD-wide certification program was developed, 
describing the process for COR certification, identifying the roles and 
responsibilities of key stakeholders, listing available COR training 
resources that meet the standard, and defining a reasonable time-phased 
implementation plan for the standard; 
Panel assessment of implementation status: Completed; 
GAO assessment of implementation status: Fully implemented. 

10. Mandate COR assignment prior to contract award; 
DOD reported actions: DOD issued an August 22, 2008, memorandum 
entitled "Monitoring Contract Performance in Contract Services" stating 
that CORs must be designated and trained prior to contract award; 
Panel assessment of implementation status: Completed; 
GAO assessment of implementation status: Fully implemented. 

11. Process COR appointment through management; ensure performance 
reviews include COR performance; 
DOD reported actions: DOD issued an August 22, 2008, memo entitled 
"Monitoring Contract Performance in Contract Services" stating that 
supervisors address the performance of COR duties as part of their 
performance assessments for personnel serving as CORs; 
Panel assessment of implementation status: Completed; 
GAO assessment of implementation status: Fully implemented. 

Source: GAO analysis and Panel on Contracting Integrity 2007, 2008, 
2009, and 2010 reports. 

[A] These recommendations are carried forward and included in the 
Panel's 2011 Actions. 

[End of table] 

[End of section] 

Appendix V: Selected GAO Recommendations Related to Non-DAWIA Personnel 
with Acquisition-related Responsibilities: 

We identified previous recommendations involving CORs--identified as 
surveillance personnel in table 5 below--in reports from 2005-2009 as 
being relevant to the training or management of non-DAWIA personnel 
with acquisition-related responsibilities. To determine the status of 
their implementation by DOD, we obtained and analyzed documentation 
from agency officials and assigned one of the following four status 
assessments to each of the recommendations: 

1. Fully Implemented. The entire wording of the action item has been 
fulfilled. 

2. Partially Implemented. Only a portion of the action has been 
implemented. When the wording of the action item had multiple parts, if 
one part or a portion of a part had been implemented (but not all 
parts), we categorized the action item as "partially implemented." 

3. Not Implemented-Action Taken. No part of the action item has been 
implemented, but steps have been taken toward the completion of the 
action item. For example, if legislation had been introduced to address 
the action but had not been enacted into law, we categorized the action 
item as "not implemented-action taken." 

4. Not Implemented-No Action. No part of the action item has been 
completed, and no action has been taken to address the action item. For 
example, if the action item called for changes in legislation but no 
legislation has even been proposed, we categorized the action item as 
"not implemented-no action." 

Table 5: Status of Selected GAO Recommendations Related to Non-DAWIA 
Personnel with Acquisition-related Responsibilities: 

GAO recommendation: 1. Ensure that the proper surveillance training of 
personnel and their assignment to service contracts occurs no later 
than the date of contract award[A]; 
DOD reported actions: DOD concurred with the recommendation and 
published guidance in December 2005 requiring contracting officers to 
designate, in writing, properly trained surveillance personnel before 
contract performance begins for DOD service contract actions awarded 
by a DOD component or by any other federal agency on behalf of DOD; 
Implementation status: Fully implemented. 

GAO recommendation: 2. Develop practices to help ensure accountability 
for personnel carrying out surveillance responsibilities[A]; 
DOD reported actions: DOD concurred with the recommendation and on 
December 6, 2006, the Director of the Defense Procurement and 
Acquisition Policy, Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for 
Acquisitions, Technology & Logistics issued a memorandum that, among 
other things, requires DOD components to ensure that the contribution 
of surveillance personnel in assisting in the monitoring or 
administration of contracts is addressed as appropriate in the 
performance reviews of these individuals; 
Implementation status: Fully implemented. 

GAO recommendation: 3. Ensure that DOD's service contract review 
process and associated data collection requirements provide information 
that will provide more management visibility over contract 
surveillance[A]; 
DOD reported actions: DOD concurred with the recommendation and 
implemented it when the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisitions, 
Technology & Logistics issued a new Acquisition of Services Policy on 
October 2, 2006; Implementation status: Fully implemented. 

GAO recommendation: 4. Direct the military departments to review their 
procedures to ensure that properly trained surveillance personnel have 
been assigned prior to and throughout a contract's period of 
performance[B]; 
DOD reported actions: DOD concurred with this recommendation. Ongoing 
efforts to develop a tracking and certification system for all DOD 
CORs should address this recommendation; 
Implementation status: Not implemented-action taken. 

Source: GAO analysis. 

[A] GAO, Contract Management: Opportunities to Improve Surveillance on 
Department of Defense Service Contracts, GAO-05-274 (Washington, D.C.: 
Mar. 17, 2005). 

[B] GAO, Defense Acquisitions: Further Actions Needed to Address 
Weaknesses in DOD's Management of Professional and Management Support 
Contracts, GAO-10-39 (Washington, D.C.: Nov. 20, 2009). 

[End of table] 

[End of section] 

Appendix VI: Comments from the Department of Defense: 

Department Of Defense: 
Defense Acquisition University: 
Office Of The President: 
9820 Belvoir Road: 
Fort Belvoir, VA 22060-5565: 

September 27, 2011: 

Ms. Belva Martin: 
Director, Acquisition and Sourcing Management: 
U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street, N.W. 
Washington, DC 20548: 

Dear Ms. Martin: 

This is the Department of Defense (DoD) response to the GAO draft 
report 11-892, "Defense Acquisition Workforce: Better Identification, 
Development and Oversight Needed for Personnel Involved in Acquiring 
Services," dated September 2011 (GAO Code 120930). We concur with the 
report recommendations, and have also provided technical comments. 

Sincerely, 

Signed by: 

Louis S. McMichael, VP, for: 

Katharina G. McFarland: 
President: 

Enclosure: As stated. 

[End of letter] 

GAO Draft Report Dated September, 2011: 
GAO-11-892 (GAO Code 120930): 

"Defense Acquisition Workforce: Better Identification, Development And 
Oversight Needed For Personnel Involved In Acquiring Services" 

Department Of Defense Comments To The GAO Recommendations: 

Recommendation 1: The GAO recommends that the Secretary of Defense 
establish criteria and a timeframe for identifying non-DAWIA personnel 
with acquisition-related responsibilities, including requirements 
officials. (See page 17/GAO Draft Report.) 

DoD Response: Concur. 

Recommendation 2: The GAO recommends that the Secretary of Defense 
assess what critical skills non-DAWIA personnel with acquisition-
related responsibilities might require to perform their role in the 
acquisition process and improve acquisition outcomes (See page 17/GAO 
Draft Report.) 

DoD Response: Concur. 

Recommendation 3: The GAO recommends that the Secretary of Defense 
designate an organization that has the responsibility to track DOD's 
progress in identifying, developing, and overseeing non-DAWIA 
personnel with acquisition-related responsibilities to help ensure 
they have the skills necessary to perform their acquisition function 
(See page 17/GAO Draft Report.) 

DoD Response: Concur. 

[End of section] 

Appendix VII: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments: 

GAO Contact: 

Belva Martin (202) 512-4841: 

Acknowledgments: 

In addition to the contact above, Penny Berrier, Assistant Director; 
Patrick Breiding; Heather Miller; John K. Needham; Keo Vongvanith; 
Morgan Delaney Ramaker; Roxanna Sun; Julia Kennon; and John Krump made 
key contributions to this report. 

[End of section] 

Footnotes: 

[1] The Defense Acquisition Workforce Improvement Act, Pub. L. No. 101-
510, § 1201-1211 (1990). This act recognized acquisition as a 
multidisciplinary career field for DOD comprised of 11 functional 
areas—program management; systems planning research, development, 
engineering, and testing; procurement, including contracting; 
industrial property management; logistics; quality control and 
assurance; manufacturing and production; business, cost estimating and 
financial management, and auditing; education, training, and career 
development; construction; and joint development and production with 
other government agencies and foreign countries. Since the act was 
passed, DOD has expanded the original list of 11 functional areas to 
include facilities engineering. Three other career fields have been 
subdivided: cost estimating and financial management; systems planning 
research, development, engineering, and testing; and program 
management. There are now a total of 16 career fields/paths covered 
under DOD’s implementation of DAWIA. 

[2] Pub. L. No. 111-84, § 1108 (b)(2) (2009). 

[3] GAO, Defense Acquisition Workforce: DOD's Training Program 
Demonstrates Many Attributes of Effectiveness, but Improvement Is 
Needed, [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-22] 
(Washington, D.C.: Oct. 28, 2010). 

[4] Contractor oversight personnel are known by many names, such as 
quality assurance evaluator, contracting officer’s representative, or 
contracting officer’s technical representative, but their duties are 
essentially the same. For the purposes of this report, we refer to 
these personnel generally as contracting officer’s representatives 
(CORs). 

[5] GAO, Defense Acquisitions: Actions Needed to Ensure Value for 
Service Contracts, GAO-09-643T (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 23, 2009). 

[6] GAO, Defense Acquisitions: Tailored Approach Needed to Improve 
Service Acquisition Outcomes, [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-20] (Washington, D.C.: Nov. 9, 
2006). 

[7] GAO, Department of Homeland Security: Better Planning and 
Assessment Needed to Improve Outcomes for Complex Service 
Acquisitions, [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-263] 
(Washington, D.C.: Apr. 22, 2008). 

[8] According to DOD officials, the mission of each military service’s 
DACM is to track personnel covered under DAWIA and identify demand for 
training. FIPTs were established for 14 different acquisition career 
fields for the DAWIA workforce. The FIPT lead advises DOD on DAWIA 
career development policies and procedures, including education, 
training, and experience requirements for civilian and military 
personnel in the acquisition workforce. They also, in conjunction with 
the DACMs, identify demand for training. 

[9] The John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2007, Pub. L. No. 109-364 § 801 (2006). 

[10] For the majority of contracts in our sample, a functional 
commander was not included in the list of non-DAWIA personnel with 
acquisition-related responsibilities reported to us by DOD. 

[11] In some instances, there was more than one program manager 
reported per contract. In others, no program manager was reported on a 
contract. There is no requirement for a program manager on services 
contracts. 

[12] Pub. L. No. 111-84, § 1108 (b)(2) (2009). 

[12] GAO, Defense Acquisition Workforce: DOD's Training Program 
Demonstrates Many Attributes of Effectiveness, but Improvement Is 
Needed, GAO-11-22 (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 28, 2010). 

[14] We initially selected 33 contracts during the design phase of our 
work to understand the differences between how goods and services were 
acquired by DOD. Once we narrowed our scope to focus on service 
contracts in a noncontingency environment, we removed 3 contracts for 
goods and a fourth contract that was contingency-related. 

[End of section] 

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 "E-mail Updates." 

Order by Phone: 

The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO’s actual cost of
production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the
publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black and
white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO’s Web site, 
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm]. 

Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or
TDD (202) 512-2537. 

Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card,
MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional 
information. 

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: