Defense Health Care: Actions Needed to Determine the Required Size and Readiness of Operational Medical and Dental Forces
Fast Facts
Does DOD have the right number and right kinds of medical personnel for wartime?
While peacetime medical care is important, a Senate committee and DOD are concerned that prioritizing it has made the military health system less able to treat combat injuries.
The Army, Navy, and Air Force do not have a common method to determine the number and kinds of medical personnel needed for wartime. We also found that DOD has not based its method for measuring medical personnel readiness on sound data or calculated the cost of attaining readiness goals.
We made 6 recommendations, including ways to better estimate the forces needed and assess readiness.
Army medical personnel during a training exercise
Army medical personnel receive instructions during a combat casualty care training exercise
Highlights
What GAO Found
The Department of Defense (DOD) has not determined the required size and composition of its operational medical and dental personnel who support the wartime mission or submitted a complete report to Congress, as required by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017. Leaders from the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) disagreed with the military departments' initial estimates of required personnel that were developed to report to Congress. OSD officials cited concerns that the departments had not applied assumptions for operating jointly in a deployed environment and for leveraging efficiencies among personnel and units. GAO found that the military departments applied different planning assumptions in estimating required personnel, such as the definition of “operational” requirements. DOD expects to provide its next update to Congress in February 2019. Until DOD establishes joint planning assumptions for developing medical and dental personnel requirements, including a definition, and a method to assess options for achieving joint efficiencies, DOD will not know whether it has the optimal requirements to achieve its missions.
DOD has begun initiatives to maintain the critical wartime readiness of medical providers. DOD's initiatives have included standardizing and expanding pre-deployment training and developing new policy on medical provider readiness. In addition, department leaders have been directing transformation efforts to improve readiness. However, DOD's methodology is limited with respect to a key initiative that will use a metric to assess medical providers' clinical readiness—a component of wartime readiness. Specifically:
DOD does not use complete, accurate, and consistent data that fully demonstrate results. Source data for the metric have not passed DOD audits for at least 3 years, and the metric does not assess the readiness of reservists who comprise a substantial portion of combat casualty care capability. Also, according to congressional testimony and related research an estimated 25 percent of combat deaths were potentially preventable but were not related to provider readiness. Thus, the metric may not lead to expected improvements in patient outcomes in operational environments. Until DOD identifies and mitigates limitations in the readiness metric data, leaders may not have the best information to support decision-making.
DOD has not made decisions about the specialties to which its metric should apply or budgeted for full implementation of the metric. DOD plans to develop a metric for 72 provider specialties. However, GAO found that 12 specialties do not deploy. According to OSD officials, few of the 72 specialties (i.e., those that practice combat casualty care) rely on highly complex skills that may rapidly degrade without regular practice and would benefit most from a metric. DOD officials stated that the metric's implementation costs may be substantial and the return on investment may differ by specialty. Moreover, DOD has not fully budgeted for implementing the metric by, for example, funding additional training for providers to meet readiness thresholds. Until DOD determines the critical wartime medical specialties to apply its clinical readiness metric and estimates the costs and benefits of applying the metric to each, it will not know if its implementation is being targeted to the areas of greatest return on investment.
Why GAO Did This Study
In recent years, the Senate Armed Services Committee and DOD have raised concerns that the military health system has prioritized peacetime care to the detriment of combat casualty care capability and wartime medical skills.
Senate Report 115-125 included a provision for GAO to review DOD's efforts to address requirements from the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 regarding the required numbers of medical and dental personnel and wartime readiness. This report examines the extent to which DOD has (1) determined and reported to Congress on its operational medical and dental personnel requirements, and (2) initiatives to maintain and a methodology to assess the critical wartime readiness of medical providers. GAO reviewed DOD reports and personnel requirements data for fiscal year 2017 and future years, and interviewed senior DOD leaders as well as officials at six military treatment facilities to represent each military department and provide a mix of patient volumes.
Recommendations
GAO is making six recommendations, including that DOD establish joint planning assumptions and a definition, and a method for assessing medical and dental personnel requirements; identify and mitigate limitations in a clinical readiness metric for medical providers; and determine specialties and estimate costs and benefits for applying a readiness metric. DOD concurred with all six recommendations and described implementation steps it plans to take.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Agency Affected | Recommendation | Status |
---|---|---|
Department of Defense | The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, in coordination with the Director, CAPE, the Joint Staff Surgeon, and the secretaries of the military departments, establish joint planning assumptions for developing operational medical and dental personnel requirements, including a definition of what forces should and should not be identified as "operational." (Recommendation 1) |
The Department of Defense concurred with this recommendation. In January 2024, DOD provided the latest Joint Medical Estimate for 2023--an input in the military departments' process for developing operational medical and dental personnel requirements--as evidence of its implementation of this recommendation. Our review of the Joint Medical Estimate found that it does not include joint planning assumptions. The document provides an independent assessment of the joint force's operational medical capabilities and identifies deficiencies in those capabilities. However, medical personnel requirements are not based on assumptions in the Joint Medical Estimate. The document also does not define "operational medical force readiness requirements" and how this term applies to personnel levels, including the extent to which it includes reserve component personnel in addition to the active components, and personnel who are not among the first to deploy. We will update the status of this recommendation when more information is available about DOD's plans to implement it.
|
Department of Defense | The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, in coordination with the Director of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation, the Joint Staff Surgeon, and the secretaries of the military departments, establish a method to assess options for achieving joint efficiencies in medical and dental personnel requirements and any associated risks. (Recommendation 2) |
The Department of Defense concurred with this recommendation and said it would take steps to implement it. In February 2024, DOD provided the latest Joint Medical Estimate for 2023--an input in the military departments' process for developing operational medical and dental personnel requirements--as evidence of its implementation of this recommendation. Our review of the Joint Medical Estimate found that it does not include information about a process for assessing options for achieving joint efficiencies. Further, the risk analysis contained in the document applies not to medical requirements but to the medical personnel inventories on hand. We will update the status of this recommendation when additional information is available about DOD's plans to implement it.
|
Department of Defense | The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, in coordination with the Director of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation, the Joint Staff Surgeon, and the secretaries of the military departments, apply joint planning assumptions and a method for assessing efficiencies and risk, use these to determine operational medical and dental requirements, and report to Congress. (Recommendation 3) |
The Department of Defense concurred with this recommendation. In February 2024, DOD provided the latest Joint Medical Estimate for 2023--an input in the military departments' process for developing operational medical and dental personnel requirements--as evidence of its implementation of this recommendation. However, we believe DOD's implementation of this recommendation is contingent upon first establishing the joint planning assumptions and method for assessing efficiencies and risk as called for in recommendations one and two. As of May 2024, recommendations one and two are not fully implemented. We will update the status of this recommendation when additional information is available from DOD about plans to implement it.
|
Department of Defense | The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs, in coordination with the Surgeons General of the military departments, identify and mitigate limitations in the clinical readiness metric, such as data reliability, a lack of complete information on reserve component providers and patient care workload performed outside of medical treatment facilities (MTFs), and the lack of linkage between the metric and patient care and retention outcomes. (Recommendation 4) |
The Department of Defense concurred with this recommendation and said it would take steps to implement it. In June 2023, DOD provided information about interim milestones for completing this recommendation. According to the information DOD provided, the department has taken some preliminary steps, such as establishing a new organization within the Defense Health Agency and issuing guidance to focus on the improvement of medical coding data--a key input to the clinical readiness metric. The remaining steps will include a program to collect performance metric data from patient care workload performed at civilian partnership facilities, and gathering several years worth of clinical readiness data to assess its linkage to retention outcomes. DOD expects to complete these remaining steps in 2025. As of May 2024, DOD had not provided updated information about the status of this recommendation. We will update the status of this recommendation as additional information becomes available.
|
Department of Defense | The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs, in coordination with the Surgeons General of the military departments and the Director of the Defense Health Agency, determines which critical wartime specialties perform high-risk, high-acuity procedures and rely upon perishable skill sets and use this information to prioritize specialties to which the clinical readiness metric could be expanded (Recommendation 5). |
The Department of Defense concurred with this recommendation. In 2023, DOD finished determining that 17 medical specialties meet the conditions in this recommendation. The department expanded the clinical readiness metric to these specialties by completing lists of required skills and dashboards to measure them. The 17 specialties include: anesthesia, cardiothoracic surgery, critical care medicine, critical care nursing, emergency medicine, emergency medicine nursing, otolaryngology head and neck surgery, general surgery, colorectal surgery, neurosurgery, oral and maxillofacial surgery, ophthalmology, orthopedic surgery, plastic surgery, trauma surgery, urologic surgery, and vascular surgery. These actions meet the intent of the recommendation.
|
Department of Defense | The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs, in coordination with each of the Surgeons General of the military departments and the Director of the Defense Health Agency, estimates the cost and benefits, by specialty, of implementing a clinical readiness metric and use that information to determine whether DODs approach should be revised. Costs to be considered should include those needed to provide additional training for medical personnel to achieve clinical readiness thresholds and to hire additional civilian personnel in MTFs to backfill military providers who leave to attend training. (Recommendation 6) |
The Department of Defense concurred with this recommendation and said it would take steps to implement it. According to information DOD provided in May 2023, the department has assembled a working group to develop a methodology and a calculation that would identify the "cost of readiness" using information from the clinical readiness metric. DOD expects to complete this effort by the end of fiscal year 2025. As of May 2024, DOD had not provided updated information about the status of this recommendation. We will update the status of this recommendation as more information becomes available.
|