Female Active-Duty Personnel: Guidance and Plans Needed for Recruitment and Retention Efforts

The role of female servicemembers in the military has expanded in the last half century as restrictions on female servicemembers serving on active duty, including in combat, have been eliminated. DOD has also stated that recruiting and retaining women is important in order to reflect the nation's population and ensure strong military leadership.

House Report 115-676 includes a provision that GAO review female retention and promotion in the military. This report examines (1) trends in the percentage of female active-duty servicemembers in the military and their attrition rates, including reported factors leading to attrition; (2) how female active-duty servicemember promotion rates compare with those of males and among females with differing characteristics, and what factors influence these rates; and (3) the extent to which DOD and the military services have plans to guide and monitor female active-duty servicemember recruitment and retention. GAO analyzed fiscal year 2004 through 2018 personnel data to identify attrition and promotion rates and conducted statistical modeling to determine the likelihood of separation and promotion, reviewed DOD reports and other literature on servicemember attrition, and interviewed officials from DOD and other military organizations.

The Department of Defense (DOD) experienced slight increases in the overall percentage of female active-duty servicemembers from fiscal year 2004 through 2018 (15.1 percent in fiscal year 2004 to 16.5 percent in fiscal year 2018), with those percentages varying by pay grade category (see figure). During that period, female enlisted and commissioned officers had higher annual attrition rates than corresponding males. However, the gaps between male and female attrition rates have narrowed. For example, in fiscal years 2004 and 2018, female enlisted servicemembers' annual attrition rates were 33.1 and 8.6 percent, respectively, and enlisted males' annual attrition rates were 22.7 and 6.1 percent respectively. GAO's statistical model found that the likelihood of separation for female servicemembers is 28 percent higher than that of males. GAO's literature review of selected studies on reasons why females separate from the military identifed six themes, including family planning, sexual assualt, and dependent care, as influencing separations.

GAO's analysis of fiscal year 2004 through 2018 data estimated that promotion rates were slightly lower for female enlisted in most years, but higher for officers as compared to their male counterparts. Specifically, female enlisted promotion rates ranged from 0.1 to 2.5 percentage points lower than male enlisted promotion rates during much of that period. However, from fiscal year 2004 through 2018, female commissioned officer promotion rates ranged from 3.3 to 5.3 percentage points higher than the rates of their male counterparts. GAO's statistical model also estimated that the likelihood of promotion outcomes varies by certain characteristics, such as gender and pay grade. For example, GAO estimated that the likelihood of promotion for female enlisted in the Navy may be lower than male enlisted, and the evidence is mixed for the other services.

DOD has identified female recruitment and retention as important to diversity in the military, but the services do not have plans that include goals, performance measures, and timeframes to guide and monitor current or future efforts to recruit and retain females. According to officials, DOD is currently updating its diversity and inclusion strategic plan; however, neither its prior plan nor the updated plan include goals, such as recruitment or retention goals, performance measures, and timelines for any one particular demographic group. DOD officials stated that retention goals have, in the past, been misconstrued as quotas and, as such, the department does not set goals or targets for gender. However, goals are not quotas and can help guide continued improvement. Without DOD guidance and service plans with goals, performance measures, and timeframes to monitor female recruitment and retention efforts, DOD may continue to miss opportunities to recruit and retain a valuable segment for its active-duty force.

GAO recommends that DOD provide the services with guidance to develop plans with goals, performance measures, and timelines to address female recruitment and retention efforts, and for the services to develop such plans. DOD concurred with the recommendations.

Since the end of World War II, the role of female servicemembers in the  military has expanded and more recent changes to laws and Department  of Defense (DOD) policies have eliminated restrictions on female  servicemembers serving in various capacities. In 2015, the Secretary of  Defense stated that he had made a commitment to building America’s  force of the future—the all-volunteer military that will defend the nation for  generations to come—and that, like the outstanding force of today, the  force of the future must continue to benefit by drawing strength from the  broadest possible pool of talent, including women, who make up over 50  percent of the population. DOD officials have also stated that recruiting  and retaining female servicemembers is important in order to more  accurately reflect the nation’s population, ensure the strongest possible  military leadership, and maintain and improve mission readiness.  Nevertheless, according to the 2017 Defense Advisory Committee on  Women in the Services (DACOWITS) report, there continues to be only  nominal gender diversity in the military, especially in the highest echelons  of departmental leadership, and more female servicemembers leave the  military at various career points than their male counterparts.

In 2015, we reported on DOD’s efforts to integrate female  servicemembers into ground combat roles. We found, among other  things, that DOD had been tracking, monitoring, and providing oversight  over the services’ efforts to integrate women into ground combat  positions, but had not developed plans to monitor long-term integration  progress. We reported that after the decisions had been made to open  positions and occupations to women, there was a lengthy implementation  process before women were able to serve in the newly opened  occupations. However, we found that the Office of the Under Secretary of  Defense for Personnel and Readiness had not developed plans for a  mechanism or process to monitor the services’ progress in their efforts to  integrate newly opened positions and occupations after January 1, 2016.  We recommended that the Secretary of Defense direct the Under  Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness to develop plans for  monitoring, after January 2016, the services’ implementation of their  integration efforts and progress in opening positions to women, including  an approach for taking any needed action. DOD concurred with and took  action to address this recommendation in March 2016 by requiring that  annual assessments regarding the full integration of women in the armed  forces be submitted no later than December 31 of each calendar year.

Additionally, in 2015, we reported on DOD and Coast Guard officer  recruiting efforts. Specifically, we reported that DOD officials recognized  the importance of increasing the representation—or total number—of  female servicemembers and that senior leadership in the military services  also expressed their intent to increase diversity within their respective  services, to include increasing the representation of female officer  applicants in both DOD and the Coast Guard. Prior to these changes, we  previously reported on the attrition and retention of female  servicemembers in the military and found that female servicemembers  generally leave the service at higher rates than male servicemembers,  although the basic pattern of attrition was similar for both male and  female servicemembers.

House Report 115-676 accompanying a bill for the John S. McCain  National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 stated that  concerns persist that higher attrition rates of female active-duty  servicemembers than male servicemembers will result in a  disproportionate impact to mission readiness if left unresolved. The  report also stated that, from an economic standpoint, when female  employees leave, organizations must deal with higher recruiting costs,  longer training times, and lower productivity. This report included a  provision for us to examine, among other things, promotion and attrition  for female servicemembers compared to other groups in the military and  the reasons for any differences in promotion and attrition.

This report examines (1) trends in the percentage of female active-duty  servicemembers in the military and their attrition rates from fiscal year  2004 through 2018, including the reported factors leading to that attrition;  (2) how female active-duty servicemember promotion rates compare with  those of their male counterparts and among female servicemembers with  differing characteristics from fiscal years 2004 through 2018, and what  factors influence these rates; and (3) the extent to which DOD and the  military services have plans to guide and monitor female active-duty  servicemember recruitment and retention.

To address these objectives, we focused our review on active-duty  enlisted servicemembers, commissioned officers, and warrant officers in  all pay grades, serving within DOD in the four military services (the Army,  the Navy, the Marine Corps, and the Air Force).

For our first and second objectives, we obtained and analyzed  servicemember personnel data for fiscal years 2004 through 2018 from  the Defense Manpower Data Center (DMDC), including service start date,  branch of service, grade, gender, race, marital status, and whether the  servicemember has dependents. We selected fiscal year 2004 through  2018 because this is the most recent 15-year time period for which DOD  has complete data available and allows for a robust trend analysis. These  data were obtained from three different files that DMDC maintains. We  aggregated these data into a single file that allowed us to analyze them  for both descriptive statistics to show trends, as well as model using  statistical analyses to examine the likelihood that specific events would  occur for various demographic characteristics. Specifically, we  implemented a discrete time method for the analysis of event histories,  using the logit model. This is a type of duration analysis methodology  that is suited to the analysis of event occurrences and their timing—which  is the time elapsed until the event occurs (e.g. number of years until  separation or promotion).

We could not control for all factors that may affect separation and  promotion, such as a servicemember’s performance and labor market  conditions. We also do not model for the promotion process of each of the  services. Therefore, our modeling provides information on possible  associations in the data, and it does not establish a causal relationship.  We determined that the data obtained and used in our analysis are  reliable for the purposes of this review by reviewing related  documentation, for example, the data dictionary associated with the  active-duty file; interviewing knowledgeable officials from DMDC; and  conducting both electronic and manual data testing to look for missing or  erroneous data.

We also conducted a literature search for existing studies that analyzed  female servicemember attrition and promotion. To identify these studies,  we conducted searches of various databases, including ProQuest,  EBSCO, Westlaw Edge, Scopus, Dialog, and the National Technical  Information Service, for studies published in calendar years 2008 through  2018. This search and review process yielded 213 potentially relevant  studies and, after further analysis, we selected 87 studies for full text  review. From the group of 87 studies, we excluded 81 studies because  they did not meet our inclusion criteria or the results were deemed not  relevant to this review. The resulting six studies were further reviewed for  content. Two analysts sequentially reviewed the full texts of these  studies to identify substantive content relevant to our review and two  methodologists sequentially reviewed them to help ensure that they were  methodologically sound for the purposes of our review. Any differences  were reconciled between the analysts and methodologists. All results  reported from the reviewed studies were deemed sufficiently reliable for  use in this report.

For our third objective, we reviewed documentation on the Office of the  Secretary of Defense’s (OSD) and services’ efforts to collect and analyze  data on diversity in the department, as well as servicemember retention.  We reviewed the department’s plans for developing and promoting  diversity and inclusion in the force, including the department’s 2012-2017  Diversity and Inclusion Strategic Plan. We reviewed a draft version of  the department’s forthcoming 2019-2024 Diversity and Inclusion Strategic  Plan. We evaluated their efforts to determine whether they met federal  internal control standards, including that management should design  appropriate types of control activities such as defining objectives clearly  and helping ensure that terms are understood at all levels. We reviewed  other publications on female recruitment and retention efforts in the  military, including reports and briefings developed by the DACOWITS and  the 2011 final report of the Military Leadership Diversity Commission to  determine what others had found and recommended with regard to  female recruitment, retention, and participation in the military. We also  analyzed our past reports and recommendations, for example, on military  personnel management and DOD’s Career Intermission Pilot Program,  among others.

For each of the objectives, we interviewed officials from the Office of  Military Personnel Policy and the Office for Diversity, Equity, and  Inclusion (ODEI), both under the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense  for Personnel and Readiness, as well as officials from the four military  services. We also interviewed representatives from DACOWITS and the  Service Women’s Action Network. Additional details on our objectives,  scope, and methodology are included in appendix II.

We conducted this performance audit from September 2018 to May 2020  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.

Background Female Participation in the U.S. Military

While female participation in the military dates back to the American  Revolution, women have formally served in United States military units  since 1901 with the establishment of the Army Nurse Corps. The Act of  May 14, 1942 authorized the president to establish and organize a  Women’s Army Auxiliary Corps for the purpose of “making available to  the national defense when needed the knowledge, skill, and special  training of the women of this Nation.” In 1948, the Women’s Armed  Services Integration Act of 1948 authorized the military services to,  subject to the provisions of the act, enlist and appoint women to their  active and reserve components.

Certain provisions of the Women’s Armed Services Integration Act of  1948, including limits on the number of women in the Navy and Marine  Corps, were repealed in 1967, and additional changes to DOD policies  have been made since then. For example, the Department of Defense  Appropriation Authorization Act, 1976 directed the secretaries of the  military departments to, among other things, take such action as may be  necessary and appropriate to insure that women were eligible for  appointment and admission to the military service academies. Almost  two decades later, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year  1994, among other things, required the Secretary of Defense to ensure  that qualification of members of the armed forces for military occupational  career fields open to both male and female members is evaluated on the  basis of common, relevant performance standards without differential  standards or evaluation on the basis of gender. It also repealed the  remaining statutory prohibitions on the Secretary of the Navy assigning  female servicemembers to duty on vessels and aircraft engaged in  combat missions or expected to be assigned combat missions.

In January 1994, the Secretary of Defense issued a memorandum  creating the Direct Ground Combat Definition and Assignment Rule,  which made servicemembers eligible for assignment to all positions for  which they were qualified, but it excluded female servicemembers from  assignment to units below the brigade level whose primary mission was  to engage in direct combat on the ground. The memorandum required  the services to coordinate approved implementing policies and  regulations—including certain service restrictions on the assignment of  women—with the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Personnel and  Readiness prior to their issuance. The memorandum also permitted the  services to propose additional exceptions.

In its 2011 final report, the Military Leadership Diversity Commission  stated that the services’ have been leaders in providing opportunities for all servicemembers, regardless of racial/ethnic background, or gender,  and stated that the DOD’s mission-effective force is a living testament to  progress in the areas of military equal opportunity policies and related  recruiting and management tactics. The report also stated that more  needs to be done to address 21st century challenges and that the Armed  Forces have not yet succeeded in developing a continuing stream of  leaders who are as demographically diverse as the nation they serve.

A 2013 Secretary of Defense and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff  memorandum rescinded the 1994 Direct Ground Combat Definition and  Assignment Rule. That memorandum also directed the military services  to open currently closed units and positions to female servicemembers,  consistent with certain principles and with the implementation of certain  standards. The memorandum also directed that the integration of female  servicemembers into these newly opened positions and units occur as  expeditiously as possible, considering good order and judicious use of  fiscal resources, and no later than January 1, 2016.

The military services also took action through issuing guidance. For  example, in 2013, the Commandant of the Marine Corps issued a letter to  Marine Corps leadership stating that it is imperative for the Marine Corps  to take a fresh approach to diversity and establishing four task force  groups, including one titled “Women in the Corps: Attract, Develop, and  Retain Women Officers.” Subsequently in June 2014, the Secretary of  the Air Force and Air Force Chief of Staff released a memorandum  establishing active-duty officer applicant pool goals, which are intended to  reflect the nation’s highly talented, diverse, and eligible population.

More recently, in 2015, the Secretary of Defense determined that no  exceptions were warranted to the full implementation of the rescission of the Direct Ground Combat Definition and Assignment Rule and directed  the secretaries of the military departments and chiefs of the military  services to begin to execute the implementation of their approved plans to  open all military occupational specialties, career fields, and branches for  accession by female servicemembers as soon as practicable and not  later than April 1, 2016. Figure 1 presents a timeline of selected events  in female participation in the military, including changes to laws and  policies.

Percentage of Female Servicemembers Increased Slightly Over 15 Years; Data and Studies Show That Female Servicemembers Attrite at Higher Rates and Are More Likely to Separate Due to Various Factors Overall Percentages of Female Active-Duty Servicemembers Increased Slightly from Fiscal Year 2004 through 2018, and the Percentages of Female Servicemembers Vary among the Services

Overall, the percentage of female active-duty servicemembers slightly  increased from fiscal year 2004 through 2018. However, our analyses  also determined that for fiscal years 2004 through 2018, female enlisted  servicemembers and commissioned officers had higher attrition rates  than their male counterparts, and the percentage of female active-duty  servicemembers began to decrease at the 10–to-less-than-20-years of  service career point, meaning a smaller pool of female servicemembers  being available for leadership opportunities. We also found that female  servicemembers are generally more likely to separate from the military,  and that the reasons active-duty servicemembers separate from the  military vary by gender, pay grade category, and length of service. In  addition, other factors—such as access to quality childcare or family  planning—have been found to influence female active-duty  servicemembers’ separation decisions based on our review of existing  literature.

The services have experienced slight increases in their populations of  female active-duty servicemembers from fiscal year 2004 through 2018.  More specifically, the overall percentage of female active-duty  servicemembers increased slightly department-wide within that 15 year  period, from 15.1 percent in fiscal year 2004 to 16.5 percent in fiscal year  2018, with slight decreases identified in some years—for example, fiscal  years 2005 through 2009. Comparatively, the percentage of males  serving on active duty decreased from 84.9 percent in 2004 to 83.5  percent in 2018.

In fiscal year 2018, the Air Force had the highest percentage of female  active-duty servicemembers (20.2 percent), followed by the Navy (19.6  percent), the Army (15.1 percent), and the Marine Corps (8.6 percent).  The Air Force also had the highest percentages of female enlisted and  officers in fiscal year 2018 (20.0 percent and 21.3 percent, respectively).

The Marine Corps (8.7 percent female enlisted and 7.9 percent female  officer), had the lowest percentages in fiscal year 2018. Figure 2 shows  the representation of active-duty servicemembers, by gender,  organization, and pay grade for fiscal year 2018.

The Air Force and the Army had higher percentages of female  servicemembers than the Navy and Marine Corps in fiscal year 2004— the first year of the data we analyzed–-and those percentages remained  relatively stable over the full 15 fiscal years of data we analyzed.  Additionally, the percentage of female servicemembers in the Air Force  remained higher in each year than in the three other services over that 15  year period. The Navy and the Marine Corps experienced larger  increases in their overall percentages of female active-duty servicemembers from fiscal year 2004 through fiscal year 2018. For  example, the overall percentage of female active-duty servicemembers in  the Navy increased by 4.9 percentage points, from 14.7 percent in fiscal  year 2004 to 19.6 percent in fiscal year 2018. The Marine Corps  experienced an increase of 2.5 percentage points in that same time  period, from 6.1 percent in fiscal year 2004 to 8.6 percent in fiscal year  2018. Figure 3 shows the percentage of female active-duty  servicemembers across all services in select years from fiscal years 2004  through 2018, by their organization.

We also found that although the percentage of female active-duty  servicemembers generally increased across the department from fiscal  year 2004 through 2018, the percentage of female active-duty  servicemembers was higher for those with fewer years of service and  generally decreased as years of service increased. Specifically, as figure  4 shows, the percentages of female enlisted and commissioned officers in  all four services with either 10 to 20 years of service or 20 or more years  of service were generally lower than those with less than 10 years of  service. We also found that the percentages of women with more years of  service were higher in more recent years, specifically in fiscal years 2014  through 2018 as compared to fiscal years 2004 through 2009. For  example, in fiscal years 2014 through 2018, the percentage of female  enlisted with 20 or more years of service (12 percent) was 2.2 percent  higher than the percentage of female enlisted in fiscal years 2004 through  2009 (9.8 percent). Similarly, the percentage of female commissioned  officers with 20 or more years of service in fiscal years 2014 through 2018  (12.1 percent) was 1.4 percent higher than female commissioned officers  with the same length of service in fiscal years 2004 through 2009 (10.7  percent). In addition, the percentage of female warrant officers with 20 or  more years of service in fiscal years 2014 through 2018 (8.3 percent) was  2.3 percent higher than female commissioned officers with the same  length of service in fiscal years 2004 through 2009 (6 percent).

Female Enlisted and Commissioned Officers Had Higher Attrition Rates than Males during Fiscal Year 2004 through 2018 and Are Generally More Likely to Separate Due to a Variety of Factors According to Data

From fiscal year 2004 through 2018, female active-duty enlisted  servicemembers and commissioned officers had higher annual attrition  rates than corresponding males during that same time period. However,  the gaps between male and female attrition rates for enlisted and  commissioned officers have narrowed in more recent years.  Specifically, for fiscal years 2004 and 2018, enlisted female active-duty  servicemembers’ annual attrition rates were 33.1 and 8.6 percent,  respectively. In fiscal years 2004 and 2018, enlisted male active-duty  servicemembers’ annual attrition rates were 22.7 and 6.1 percent,  respectively.

For fiscal years 2004 and 2018, female commissioned officer annual  attrition rates were 10 and 0.7 percent respectively, while male  commissioned officer annual attrition rates were 6 and 0.4 percent in  those same years, respectively. In fiscal years 2004 and 2018, female  warrant officer annual attrition rates were 12.5 and 0 percent, and male  warrant officer annual attrition rates were 3.2 and 0 percent in fiscal years  2004 and 2018, respectively. Figure 5 shows active-duty servicemember  annual attrition rates over time from 2004 through 2018, by gender and  pay grade.

Additionally, we developed a set of statistical models—all discrete time  duration analysis—using data from fiscal years 2004 through 2018 which  accounted for active-duty servicemembers’ time in service (i.e., the period  of time from when they joined the military until their separation). The  models estimated the association of gender with separation. We  accounted for specific servicemember characteristics, such as gender,  branch of military service, pay grade, race or ethnicity, marital status, and  the existence of dependents to estimate the associations that these  characteristics have with active-duty servicemembers separating from the  service.

The results of our statistical models show that female active-duty  servicemembers are more likely to separate from the military than males  at any given period of time in service. The average estimated likelihood of  female active-duty servicemembers’ separation for each quarter year of  time in service is 2.3 percent, while the average estimate for male active- duty servicemembers is 1.8 percent. In relative terms, the likelihood of  separation for female active-duty servicemembers is 28 percent higher  than the likelihood of separation for male active-duty servicemembers.  When controlling for various individual and occupational characteristics— including pay grade categories, marital status, race or ethnicity, education  level, occupation, and whether the servicemember has dependents— among others—female active-duty servicemembers’ average estimated  likelihood of separating from the military per quarter year of time in  service ranges from 1.8 percent to 3.1 percent, depending on their branch  of service, while that for their male counterparts ranges from 1.4 percent  to 2.3 percent, if other personal characteristics remain the same. In  relative terms, the likelihood of separation for female active-duty  servicemembers is estimated to be 13 to 46 percent higher than that of  their male counterparts. Based on our statistical models, we also found  the following by particular characteristics:

Married versus unmarried without dependents: In all of the  services, both female and male married active-duty servicemembers  without dependents are more likely to separate from the military than  unmarried male and female active-duty servicemembers without  dependents. For example, the likelihood of separation for both female  and male married active-duty servicemembers without dependents in  the Air Force and the Navy are twice as high as male and female  unmarried active-duty servicemembers without dependents in the  same services.

Married with dependents versus unmarried without dependents:  Married male active- duty servicemembers with dependents in all of  the services except the Air Force are less likely to separate from the  military than unmarried males without dependents. However,  married female active-duty servicemembers who have dependents  and are serving in the Army, the Navy, and the Air Force are more  likely to separate compared to unmarried female active-duty  servicemembers without dependents. For example, in the Navy, the  likelihood of separation for married female active-duty  servicemembers who have dependents is 17 percent higher relative to  that for unmarried female active-duty servicemembers without  dependents. Comparatively, we estimate that the likelihood of  separation for married male active-duty servicemembers in the Navy  who have dependents is 28 percent lower than the likelihood of  separation for unmarried male active-duty servicemembers in the  Navy who do not have dependents.

Unmarried with dependents versus unmarried without  dependents: In all four services, unmarried female active-duty  servicemembers who have dependents are more likely to separate  from the military than their unmarried counterparts who do not have  dependents. Our analysis produced similar results for unmarried male  active-duty servicemembers with dependents, except for those  serving in the Navy, who we found are less likely to separate than  unmarried male active-duty servicemembers without dependents.  More specifically, we estimate that the likelihood of separation for  unmarried male and female active-duty servicemembers who have  dependents and serve in the Army, Marine Corps, or Air Force, is  from 9 percent to 32 percent higher than that for their unmarried male  and female counterparts who do not have dependents. Further, we  estimate that the likelihood of separation for unmarried female active- duty servicemembers who are serving in the Navy and who have  dependents is 35 percent higher relative to the likelihood of separation  for those female servicemembers who serve in the Navy and are  unmarried and do not have dependents.

Pay grade categories: Our analysis found that enlisted male and  female active-duty servicemembers in all of the services are more  likely to separate from the military than male and female active-duty  officers and warrant officers within the same service.  For example,  we estimate that the likelihood of separation for male and female  officers serving in the Navy is 62 and 63 percent lower, respectively,  relative to the likelihood of separation for enlisted male and female  active-duty servicemembers serving in the Navy.

Race or ethnicity minority groups versus whites: In all of the  services, black and Hispanic female active-duty servicemembers are  less likely to separate from the military than white female active-duty  servicemembers. All other racial or ethnic minority female active-duty  servicemembers are also less likely to separate from the military than  white female active-duty servicemembers except in the Army. More  specifically, we estimate that black, Hispanic, and all other racial or  ethnic minority female active-duty servicemembers in all of the  services (except in the Army) are at least 13 percent less likely to  separate from the military relative to white female active-duty  servicemembers. All other racial or ethnic minority female active-duty  servicemembers (except black and Hispanic) serving in the Army are  estimated to be 26 percent more likely to separate from the military  relative to white female active-duty servicemembers.

In 2011, the Military Leadership Diversity Commission’s final report  discussed explanations for discrepancies in representation among senior  military leaders, including lower retention of mid-level female enlisted and  officer servicemembers. Additionally, OSD officials stated that, in 2017,  ODEI conducted an assessment of diversity and inclusion among officers  that analyzed fiscal year 2012 through 2016 data to determine whether  there was a difference between male and female retention within each of  the services. According to DOD, ODEI found various increases and  decreases in female retention; however, the officials stated that the  assessment did not include an analysis to identify the reasons for the  differences in retention among female servicemembers within the  services.

In its 2017 and 2018 reports, DACOWITS identified dual-military couples  as facing retention challenges and the 2017 report stated that,  proportionally, more female servicemembers are married to a military  spouse than are male servicemembers. Additionally, in the 2017 report,  DACOWITS stated that servicemembers who are separated from the  military because of issues related to parenthood, including family care  plans, are disproportionately female. The DACOWITS report further  stated that, according to data provided to DACOWITS by the services,  between fiscal year 2007 and 2016, female servicemembers represented  between 65 and 83 percent of parenthood-related discharges.

We also analyzed 15 years of separation code data (fiscal years 2004 to  2018) to identify the documented reasons why active-duty  servicemembers separated from the military during that time. Our  analysis of these data found that the reasons active-duty servicemembers  separate from the military vary slightly based on gender, pay grade  category, and length of service, as well as by time period. For example,  misconduct was a top reason for separation from 2004 through 2013 for  enlisted male servicemembers with 5 or fewer years of service, whereas  pregnancy was one of the top three reasons for separation for female  enlisted with 5 or fewer years of service, during that same period.  However, neither misconduct for male servicemembers nor pregnancy for  female servicemembers were found to be in the top three reasons for  separation in fiscal years 2014-2018. The results of this analysis are  shown below in figures 6, 7, and 8.

Other Factors Identified in the Literature That Can Influence Female Active- Duty Servicemembers’ Decisions to Separate from Military Service

To better understand other factors that may underlie a servicemember’s  decision to separate, we reviewed a variety of studies on female active- duty servicemember retention in the military. Through our review, we  identified six factors that were reported to influence female active-duty  servicemembers’ separation from the military: work schedules,  deployments, organizational culture, family planning, sexual assault, and  dependent care.

Work schedules. Specifically, four of the six studies in our literature  review cited work schedule as a reason for or factor influencing  separation by female active-duty servicemembers. For example, in  several studies female active-duty servicemembers cited the demands  and uncertainty of their work schedules. In one study, which asked senior  female enlisted Army personnel about the primary factors responsible for  their decision to leave the military, a review of the participants’ responses  indicated that the primary factor responsible for female servicemembers  exiting the service sooner than their male counterparts was that the  female members believed they constantly had to sacrifice family time for  their careers. In another study, former female active-duty naval surface  warfare officers cited the uncertainty of their work schedules as having a  strong influence on their decision to separate from the military.

Deployments. The occurrence of deployments and their effects on family  life were also highlighted in four of the six studies as factors influencing  female servicemembers’ decisions to separate from the military. For  example, one study of female Air Force pilots identified deployments as a  factor that caused them to consider leaving active duty. In another study,  which included 295 active-duty and reserve female officers in grades O-1  to O-5, participants in 94 percent of the 54 focus group mentioned  deployments as an important negative influence on retention, given their  effect on spouses and children.

Organizational culture. Organizational culture also had an effect on  female servicemembers’ decisions to separate from the military in four of  the six studies we reviewed. In one study, female active-duty, reserve,  and Air National Guard officers in the Air Force mentioned the lack of  female mentors and role models in leadership positions, and the  experience of sexism as factors influencing the decision to separate.  Female servicemembers also discussed how having leaders who are not  supportive or understanding of family needs can contribute to a negative  or toxic work environment. Study participants also noted that they often  faced sexism and the existence of an “old boy’s network,” especially in  career fields dominated by males. As such, these female servicemembers  felt they had to work harder to prove themselves and also felt they were  sometimes not treated equally because they were female.

Family planning. Three of the six studies in our literature review cited  family planning as being another characteristic that influences separation  for female active-duty servicemembers. In one study, female officers in a  majority of focus groups (85 percent of 54 focus groups) mentioned  issues related to pregnancy that could affect their decisions to stay in or  leave the Air Force. More specifically, Air Force female officers (active  duty, reserve, and Air National Guard) cited the difficulty of timing  pregnancies to fit within rigid career timelines. These female  servicemembers stated that they felt they needed to ensure that  pregnancy occurred at certain times in their careers to minimize negative  career effects. Even with that effort, the female servicemembers stated  that negative effects still persisted due to missed opportunities while  pregnant, such as in-residence professional military education, or career- field specific problems, such as loss of flying time for pilots.

Sexual assault. Two of the six studies in our literature review cited  sexual assault as a reason for separation by female active-duty  servicemembers. In one study, female military veterans mentioned both  the occurrence of a sexual assault and how it was handled by the military  as contributing to their separation. For example, two females stated that  the perpetrator was not punished, and another woman cited the lack of  support from other servicemembers as contributing to their decisions to  separate from the military. In another study examining female officer  retention (active duty, reserve, and Air National Guard) in the Air Force, a  few participants cited cases in which either they or individuals they knew  had decided to leave specifically because of a sexual assault.  Participants commented that female officers often do not want to report  the incident, deciding instead to separate.

Dependent care. Two of the six studies in our literature review also  mentioned challenges with dependent care as influencing female  servicemembers’ decisions to separate from the military. For example, in  one study, female military veterans cited difficulties being separated from  their children for long time periods as a reason for ending military service.  These difficulties were both emotional and practical, including limited  stable and safe placement options for children while mothers were  deployed. In another study, female Air Force officers in 59 percent of 54  focus groups stated that difficulties with childcare development centers on  military bases—including service hours that were incompatible with their  work schedules, inconsistent quality of care, and long waitlists—could  influence their separation decisions. Participants in that study’s focus  groups stated that childcare development centers often have limited  hours that make it difficult to coordinate childcare with long work hours or  shift work. For example, according to the study’s focus group participants,  pilots are sometimes required to fly at night and regularly need overnight  child care, outside of typical childcare development center hours. Further,  participants stated that some female servicemembers also raised  concerns about the quality of care at childcare development centers,  noting that the quality of employees is not consistent across locations and  that the childcare development centers generally do not provide day-care  services that include educational activities to enhance children’s learning,  unlike some off-base options. In addition, some female servicemembers  in that same study’s focus groups cited problems setting up childcare with  childcare development centers before the end of their maternity leave due  to lengthy wait lists.

Promotion Rates from Fiscal Year 2004 through 2018 Varied by Gender for Enlisted and Officers, and the Likelihood of Promotion Differs by Demographic Factors

Our analyses determined that for fiscal years 2004 through 2018, female  active-duty servicemember promotion rates were slightly lower for  enlisted in most years, but higher for officers as compared to their male  counterparts. We also found that the percentage of promotions for eligible  female and male active-duty servicemembers decreases at certain grade  levels, and the likelihood of promotion varies across certain  characteristics, including gender and pay grade.

Promotion Rates for Female Enlisted Were Slightly Lower, While Promotion Rates for Female Officers Were Slightly Higher Than Males from Fiscal Years 2004 through 2018

Overall, we estimated that in most years from fiscal years 2004 through  2018, promotion rates for female enlisted active-duty servicemembers  were slightly lower than those for male enlisted active-duty  servicemembers. Specifically, female enlisted promotion rates were lower  than male enlisted promotion rates by a range of 0.1 percentage points to  2.5 percentage points during much of that time period. However, in fiscal  years 2015 and 2018, female enlisted promotion rates were higher than  their male counterparts by 0.1 percentage points and 0.4 percentage  points, respectively. In contrast, female commissioned officers had higher  promotion rates than male commissioned officers each year during that  same period. Specifically, from fiscal years 2004 through 2018, female  commissioned officer promotion rates ranged from 3.3 to 5.3 percentage  points higher than male commissioned officer promotion rates. Similarly,  from fiscal year 2004 through 2018, female warrant officer promotion  rates were higher—a range of 1.5 to 19.3 percentage points—than male  warrant officer promotion rates in most years. However, in fiscal years  2015 and 2016, promotion rates for male warrant officers were higher by  1.4 percentage points and 1.9 percentage points, respectively. Figure 9  shows active-duty servicemember annual promotion rates over time, by  gender and pay grade category, for fiscal years 2004 through 2018. We  also present additional data in appendix III on servicemember promotion  rates in fiscal years 2004 through 2018.

The 2017 DACOWITS report stated that female servicemembers are  particularly underrepresented in military leadership and, as of July 2017,  the percentages of female servicemembers in the highest ranks were  much lower than in the lowest ranks, particularly among officers.  Further, according to DACOWITS, the percentage of female  servicemembers declined by nearly two-thirds from the lowest to highest- ranking commissioned officer position, and by nearly half from the lowest  to highest-ranking enlisted position. Through our analysis of DMDC  data, we found a similar trend in 2018 with the percentage of female  servicemembers declining by nearly three quarters from the lowest to  highest-ranking commissioned officer positions (21 percent to 5.4  percent). Additionally, the trend was also similar for enlisted personnel for  which the percentage of female enlisted declined by nearly half from the  lowest to highest-ranking positions (16.6 percent to 9.1 percent).

The Likelihood of Servicemember Promotion Varies across Demographic Groups, Including Gender and Other Factors

Based on our discrete time duration analysis, we estimated that  promotion rates may vary for female active-duty servicemembers relative  to their male counterparts across the services, after adjusting for certain  demographic and occupation-specific factors, including gender, time in  service, branch of service, pay grade, marital status, and whether the  active-duty servicemember has dependents. We estimated that in the  Navy, enlisted female active-duty servicemembers may have a lower  likelihood of promotion than their male counterparts, whereas the  evidence is mixed for the Army, the Marine Corps, and the Air Force after  controlling for certain individual- and occupation-level characteristics.  Figure 10 presents the likelihood of female promotion as compared to  males when controlling for time in service, while figure 11 presents the  difference in likelihood of promotion when controlling for various  demographic factors.

Officials from the Service Women’s Action Network told us that, with  regard to career progression, the rigidity and timing of some job  requirements for certain military occupational specialties are not  conducive to becoming pregnant or raising a young family. Specifically,  these officials stated that such requirements—for example, Naval surface  warfare tours—often occur at the time in a female active-duty  servicemember’s life when she may try to become pregnant or have  young children. However, according to these officials, such tours must  occur at these specific points in one’s career in order to get promoted.

Similarly, the Military Leadership Diversity Commission reported in its  2011 final report that, although the services do not have a checklist of  assignments required for promotion, each service, community, and career  field has a notional career path comprising key work and educational  assignments, including leadership and staff assignments early on in one’s  career, holding command assignments, meeting certain educational  milestones, and holding executive officer or assistant positions to current  flag or general officers. Further, the report stated that women and  minorities face barriers to serving in such key assignments which can  affect their ability to reach senior leadership ranks. The Military  Leadership Diversity Commission also reported that one barrier may  include lack of sufficient knowledge about these key assignment  opportunities, perhaps because women and minorities may not receive  the same career counselling or mentoring about key assignments as their  white male counterparts.

DOD officials stated that as part of the 2017 ODEI assessment, female  promotion rates were also analyzed across the services. According to  those officials, the assessment found variations in promotion rates from  fiscal year 2012 through fiscal year 2016 among female servicemembers;  however officials also stated that the assessment did not include an  analysis to identify the reasons for the differences in promotion rates  among female and male servicemembers.

DOD Identified Female Recruitment and Retention as Important to Diversity, but the Military Services Have Not Developed Plans to Guide and Monitor Such Efforts

DOD has identified that female recruitment and retention is important to  diversity in the military, but the services do not have plans that include  goals, performance measures, or timeframes to guide and monitor current  or future efforts to recruit and retain female active-duty servicemembers.  While recruiting is an important first step in building a diverse force and  increasing the representation of female servicemembers, retention plays  a similarly important role in maintaining that diversity once it is achieved.

DOD’s 2012-2017 Diversity and Inclusion Strategic Plan, quoting the  2011 National Military Strategy, stated that the all-volunteer force must  represent the country it defends and benefits immensely from the different  perspectives and linguistic and cultural skills of all Americans. According  to ODEI officials, the department is currently updating its diversity and  inclusion strategic plan to guide efforts through 2024. However, neither  the 2012-2017 plan nor the draft updated plan, according to officials, has  a focus on goals, such as recruitment or retention goals, for any one  particular demographic group. Officials we interviewed stated that there is  a general goal to recruit a force that reflects the makeup of the country it  represents as a method for encouraging trust in the military among the  population at large. However, according to OSD and service officials, the  department emphasizes gender-neutral occupational standards and  policies, with its focus on recruiting and retaining the best and brightest  service members. Specifically, OSD officials stated that the department’s  priorities and goals are aimed at improving the retention and promotion  rates of all active-duty servicemembers, while ongoing OSD efforts to  evaluate diversity within the department focus more broadly on the overall  state of diversity of both the military and civilian workforces. OSD  officials further stated that retention goals have, in the past, been  misconstrued as quotas based on gender and, as such, the department  does not set goals or targets for gender.

While we recognize the department’s concern about goals being  misconstrued as quotas, goals are not quotas and we have previously  reported that quantitative and qualitative performance measures “help  organizations translate their diversity aspirations into tangible practice.”  For example, an organization can track data on its workforce to evaluate  the effectiveness of the organization’s diversity management efforts and  the progress it is making in those efforts. In addition to analyzing  quantitative workforce data, we further reported that organizations can  use qualitative data derived from interviews, focus groups, and surveys to  identify employee perceptions—including available opportunities and  work environment or culture—among various segments of their  workforces.

In its 2017 report, DACOWITS stated that each of the military services  experiences challenges retaining women to a varying degree, with a  particularly wide gender gap in operational specialties. DACOWITS’  report further stated that concerns persist that this attrition will result in a  disproportionate impact to mission readiness if left unresolved.  DACOWITS has also made a number of recommendations specific to the  services’ efforts to address and increase female representation in the  military through the use of goals and targets. For example, in 2014,  DACOWITS recommended that the services should have targets to  increase the representation of enlisted female servicemembers and that  these targets should be benchmarked against the pool of eligible  recruits. Subsequently in 2015, DACOWITS recommended, among  other things, that the services should set goals to systematically increase  the representation of women in the officer and enlisted ranks.

However, according to officials from the four services, the services  currently do not have plans that include goals, performance measures,  and timeframes to guide and monitor efforts to recruit and retain female  servicemembers. For example, Marine Corps officials stated that DOD  has not tasked the Marine Corps to prioritize gender with regard to  retention or promotion. Marine Corps officials also stated that the  Marine Corps does not have any programs or initiatives that focus  specifically on reducing attrition and increasing retention of female  servicemembers and that its programs focus on increasing the retention  of quality Marines—regardless of gender. As another example, Air  Force officials stated that, while the Air Force has some specific initiatives  that each have their own goals, performance measures, and timeframes  included as part of those initiatives, these efforts have not been  consolidated into a deliberate plan that targets female servicemembers.  Navy and Army officials also stated that their respective services do not  have plans specific to female retention efforts.

We found that OSD has not provided guidance to the services to develop  and implement plans to guide and monitor their efforts to recruit and  retain female servicemembers. While DOD is in the process of updating  its diversity and inclusion strategic plan to guide efforts through 2024, the  updated plan will focus—like the 2012-2017 plan—on providing an  overarching construct for the department’s diversity efforts. DOD’s 2012- 2017 Diversity and Inclusion Strategic Plan recognized that, due to the  significant amount of time it takes to develop senior DOD leaders, it is  essential that the department act to tap into the nation’s growing diverse  talent pool. We have previously reported that pressures facing DOD— including increased competition for resources and involvement in more  than a decade of conflict—underscore the importance of using a strategic  approach to recruiting, developing, and retaining its workforce. In  addition, although DOD has reported that the services generally met  overall recruiting and retention goals—goals that do not consider  gender—we have also reported in recent years on challenges associated  with meeting its goals for certain critical skills and specialties—for  example, the medical field and pilots—and rebuilding readiness across  the force. Given appropriate planning and monitoring, the department  could, as the former Secretary of Defense stated in 2015, benefit by  drawing strength from the broadest possible pool of talent, which includes  the female population that makes up over 50 percent of the population.

Our prior work on effective strategic workforce planning states that  agencies should periodically measure their progress toward meeting  human capital goals and the extent to which human capital activities  contribute to achieving programmatic goals and provide information for  effective oversight by identifying performance shortfalls and appropriate  corrective actions. In addition, internal control standards for the federal  government state that management should define objectives clearly,  including what is to be achieved , who is to achieve it, how it will  be achieved—and in what timeframes—in addition to helping ensure that  terms are understood at all levels. Finally, the standards also stipulate  that management should develop information needed for corrective  action, if necessary.

Until DOD provides clear guidance and the services establish plans for  monitoring and guiding their efforts to recruit and retain female active-duty  servicemembers, including establishing goals, performance measures,  and timeframes, the department may continue to experience slow growth  of the female population and miss opportunities to retain a valuable  segment of the population for its active-duty force.

Women have been eligible for appointment and admission to the military  service academies for over 40 years and, more recently, DOD has taken  steps to open more positions to female servicemembers, including ground  combat positions. However, while DOD has identified that it intends to  increase diversity—including gender diversity—across the services, data  show that the overall percentage of female servicemembers across the  department has increased slightly from fiscal years 2004 through 2018. In  addition to this slight overall growth, female enlisted and commissioned  officer rates of attrition during that same period were slightly higher in comparison to their male counterparts. The percentage of female active- duty servicemembers tends to decrease at the 10-to-less-than-20 years  of service category, and female active-duty servicemembers are more  likely to separate from the military than their male counterparts. Moreover,  from fiscal years 2004 through 2018, promotion rates for female active- duty servicemembers were slightly lower among the enlisted ranks in  most years, but higher for officers as compared to their male  counterparts.

DOD has an ongoing effort to study the state of diversity in the  department and is in the process of developing a new Diversity and  Inclusion Strategic Plan for 2019-2024. However, these efforts address  the department’s overall diversity and do not provide guidance to the  services for developing plans to guide and monitor efforts to recruit and  retain female active-duty servicemembers. Without such guidance and  clear plans that include goals, performance measures, and timeframes to  guide and monitor efforts to recruit and retain female servicemembers in  the active-duty force, the services are not positioned to achieve the  department’s goals of maintaining a ready force that includes the best  and the brightest and is also representative of the population it serves.

We are making a total of five recommendations—one to the Secretary of  Defense and one to each of the military services. Specifically:  The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of  Defense for Personnel and Readiness provides guidance to the services,  for example, in its forthcoming diversity and inclusion strategic plan, to  develop plans, with clearly defined goals, performance measures, and  timeframes, to guide and monitor recruitment and retention efforts of  female active-duty servicemembers in the military. (Recommendation 1)

The Secretary of the Army should develop a plan, with clearly defined  goals, performance measures, and timeframes, to guide and monitor the  Army’s female active-duty servicemember recruitment and retention  efforts. (Recommendation 2)

The Secretary of the Navy should develop a plan, with clearly defined  goals, performance measures, and timeframes, to guide and monitor the  Navy’s female active-duty servicemember recruitment and retention  efforts. (Recommendation 3)

The Secretary of the Navy should ensure that the Commandant of the  Marine Corps develops a plan, with clearly defined goals, performance  measures, and timeframes, to guide and monitor the Marine Corps’  female active-duty servicemember recruitment and retention efforts.  (Recommendation 4)

The Secretary of the Air Force should develop a plan, with clearly defined  goals, performance measures, and timeframes, to guide and monitor the  Air Force’s female active-duty servicemember recruitment and retention  efforts. (Recommendation 5)

We provided a draft of this report to DOD for review and comment. In its  written comments, reproduced in appendix V, DOD and the services  concurred with our recommendations and noted steps the department  has taken and would be taking. DOD also provided technical comments,  which we incorporated, as appropriate.

We are sending copies of this report to the appropriate congressional  committees, the Secretary of Defense; the Secretary of the Army; the  Secretary of the Navy; the Commandant of the Marine Corps; the  Secretary of the Air Force; the Office for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion;  and other interested parties. In addition, the report is available at no  charge on the GAO website at http://www.gao.gov.

If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please contact  me at (202) 512-3604 or farrellb@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices  of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last  page of this report. GAO staff who made major contributions to this report  are listed in appendix VI.

Appendix I: List of Sources Used in the Literature Review and Content Analysis

Caswell, David C.USAF Female Pilot Turnover Influence: A Delphi Study  of Work-Home Conflict.Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio:  Department of the Air Force, Air Force University, Air Force Institute of  Technology (June 2016).  https://ntrl.ntis.gov/NTRL/dashboard/searchResults/titleDetail/AD1054221 .xhtml.

Dichter, Melissa E. and Gala True. ““This is the Story of Why My Military  Career Ended Before It Should Have”: Premature Separation From  Military Service Among U.S. Women Veterans.” Affilia: Journal of Women  & Social Work, vol. 30, no. 2 (2015): 187-199.  http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0886109914555219.  https://dialog.proquest.com/professional/docview/1681926518?accountid =12509.

Keller, Kirsten M., Kimberly Curry Hall, Miriam Matthews, Leslie Adrienne  Payne, Lisa Saum-Manning, Douglas Yeung, David Schulker, Stefan  Zavislan, and Nelson Lim. Addressing Barriers to Female Officer  Retention in the Air Force (Santa Monica, California: RAND Corporation,  2018). https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR2073.html.

Pierce, Penny F., TriService Nursing Research Program. Women  Veterans Project: Operation Iraqi Freedom. Ann Arbor, Michigan:  University of Michigan (2008).  https://ntrl.ntis.gov/NTRL/dashboard/searchResults/titleDetail/PB2013101 316.xhtml.

Stoker, Carol and Alice Crawford. Surface Warfare Officer Retention:  Analysis of Individual Ready Reserve Survey Data. Monterey, California:  Naval Postgraduate School, Graduate School of Business and Public  Policy (January 22, 2008).  https://ntrl.ntis.gov/NTRL/dashboard/searchResults/titleDetail/ADA476863 .xhtml.

Williams, Nanette Marie, The Influence of Contemporary Army Culture on  Senior Enlisted Women’s Decision to Commit to a Lifelong Career. Flint,  Michigan: Baker College, 2013.  https://search.proquest.com/docview/1427847908?accountid=12509.

Appendix II: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

To address these objectives, we focused our review on active-duty  enlisted, officers, and warrant officers in all ranks and pay grades, serving  within the four military services (the Army, the Navy, the Marine Corps,  and the Air Force). For our first and second objectives, we obtained and  analyzed servicemember personnel data for fiscal year 2004 through  2018 from the Defense Manpower Data Center (DMDC), including, for  example, service start date, branch of service, status, grade, gender,  race, marital status, and whether the servicemember has dependents.  We selected fiscal year 2004 through 2018 because, at the time we  submitted our request for data, this was the most recent 15-year time  period for which DMDC had complete data available.

These data were obtained from three different files maintained by DMDC,  including the (1) Active-Duty File Monthly Snapshots, (2) Transaction data  for active-duty separations for October 1, 2003 through September 30,  2018, and (3) the Defense Enrollment Eligibility Reporting System. The  data obtained from DMDC are granular down to the single month and  single servicemember. We aggregated these data into a single file that  allowed us to analyze them for (1) descriptive statistics to show trends  and (2) modeling using duration analysis to show trends to examine the  likelihood of occurrence for specific events for various demographic and  DOD-specific administrative characteristics. We analyzed these data  based on specific demographic characteristics, including gender, race,  ethnicity, pay grade, and other variables. While the focus of this review  was female active-duty servicemembers, we analyzed data on male  active-duty servicemembers, using the same demographic and  administrative characteristics, as the primary comparison group. We also  analyzed the data to identify and compare the reasons for separation by  these different groups and characteristics based on assigned separation  designator codes.

To assess the reliability of the data obtained from DMDC, we reviewed  related documentation, for example, the data dictionary associated with  the active-duty file; interviewed knowledgeable officials from DMDC; and  conducted both electronic and manual data testing to look for missing or  erroneous data. For example, within the data, some servicemembers  changed their race, ethnicity, and/or gender over time. Through  discussions with DMDC, we determined that these are often errors in the  data, but in some instances can be the result of personal decisions by the  servicemember. DMDC recommended using the last known instance for  each of these attributes for each point on the servicemembers’ timeline.  We implemented this recommendation, as it improved the results and  findings and avoided servicemembers being counted across multiple,  exclusive demographics—i.e., double counted. Based on these steps, we  determined that these data were sufficiently reliable for the purposes of  analyzing and reporting on the representation of servicemembers with  specific demographic characteristics and the rates of attrition and  promotion among those servicemembers for fiscal year 2004 through  2018. We also determined that fiscal year 2004 through 2018 DMDC data  were sufficiently reliable for the purposes of constructing a duration  analysis statistical model to estimate the likelihood of attrition by  servicemembers with specific demographic factors.

We used the fiscal year 2004 through 2018 DMDC data to construct  descriptive statistics of the demographic composition of the services’  active-duty forces and drew comparisons between female and male  servicemembers, and across demographic and administrative  characteristics. According to service officials, the department does not  have a universal definition for attrition. We, therefore, constructed attrition  rates for active-duty servicemembers by capturing (1) any enlisted  servicemember who separated more than 1 week from the end of his or  her first service contract, and (2) any officer who separated within 3 years  of his or her start date. Attrition rates were calculated by taking the total  number of members who attritted, per the definitions above, in a given  fiscal year and dividing that number by the total number of officers or  enlisted servicemembers in that year, times 100 to express as a percent.  To prevent double counting of non-attritted members across multiple  fiscal years, attritted and non-attritted members were counted in the year  that they entered service and not the year that they separated. In order to  construct promotion rates for active-duty servicemembers, we used the  servicemembers’ time-in-grade, time-in-service, and each service’s policy  for time-in-service and time-in-grade minimums for each pay grade to  determine eligibility for promotion. For every fiscal year, if a  servicemember was eligible for promotion whether they promoted or not,  the servicemember was counted as eligible. If the servicemember did  promote, then the servicemember was counted as promoted. The  promotion rate for each category was calculated as the total number of  promoted servicemembers divided by the total number of promotion- eligible servicemembers, times 100 to express as a percent.

We also conducted an analysis of associations between each of  separation and promotion outcomes and certain demographic  characteristics for servicemembers using the servicemember personnel  data from DMDC for fiscal years 2004 through 2018, which included  quarterly data on individual servicemembers. These data also contain  information for each servicemember on the timing of his or her separation  and promotions, if any. Specifically, we implemented a discrete time  method for the analysis of event histories, using a logit specification. This  is a type of duration analysis methodology that is suited to the analysis of  event occurrences and their timing—which is the time elapsed until the  event occurs (e.g. number of years until separation or promotion).

We examined the extent to which each active-duty servicemember’s  separation and promotions (or lack thereof) may be associated with  certain factors related to that servicemember’s demographic and  occupational characteristics. These factors were time-invariant (e.g. race,  gender, etc.) or time-varying (e.g. occupation, marital status, etc.). For our  duration models for separation, we generally included (1) gender, (2)  marital status, (3) the existence of dependents, (4) race and ethnic  groups, (5) pay grade categories, (6) having a bachelor’s degree or  higher education degree versus not, (7) whether the individual has been  assigned to an overseas duty location, (8) occupation, (9) fiscal year fixed  effect, and (10) quarter-year time-in-service fixed effect. We tested  multiple models and included various sets of factors. Since the number of  female active-duty servicemembers decreases at higher pay grades, this  was taken into account for our duration models for promotion. To ensure  convergence of our promotion models, we made the following  adjustments in control variables. We started with the Marine Corps’  promotion data because the service has the smallest proportion of female  active-duty servicemembers among the four services. After testing with  multiple sets of different control variables with the data, we decided to use  the following control variables. (See table 1.)

We could not control for all factors that may affect separation and  promotion, such as a servicemember’s performance and labor market  conditions. We also did not model the promotion process in the services.  Our modeling should thus be viewed as evidence that may inform on  possible associations in the data, and does not establish a causal  relationship. Additional inquiry into each of the observed separation and  promotion cases would be needed to truly ascertain the role of certain  factors, such as gender, in each of these cases.

Additionally, we conducted a literature review and content analysis of  existing research on promotion and retention in the military, with a focus  on female servicemembers. To identify studies, we conducted searches  of various databases, including ProQuest, EBSCO, Westlaw Edge,  Scopus, Dialog, and the National Technical Information Service, for  English-language sources published in calendar year 2008 through 2018.  We searched for peer-reviewed material, government and non- governmental reports, conference papers, books, and dissertations or  theses. The database search was conducted from December 21, 2018 to  January 10, 2019.

This search and review process yielded 213 potentially relevant studies  after initial scoping by a research librarian and, after additional screening  of titles and abstracts for relevance, resulted in the selection of 87 studies  for full text review. Specifically, two analysts sequentially reviewed the  full texts for substantive content and reconciled any differences. Two  methodologists sequentially reviewed the full texts for methodological  considerations and reconciled any differences. Then the analysts and  methodologists discussed and reconciled any remaining differences.

To be included in our review, studies had to either (1) include factors  servicemembers reported about intended or actual separations, including  retention; or (2) report analyses designed to identify characteristics that  statistically predict service separation or attrition differences among  female servicemembers or between female and male servicemembers.  The studies had to include primarily one or more of the four military  services within DOD and could not focus exclusively on the Coast Guard.  The studies also had to include primarily active-duty personnel and could  not focus exclusively on reserve component personnel. Studies that  focused only on recruitment or accessions, exit or lateral transfer from a  career field but not separation from service, or data collected only from  military spouses were also deemed out of scope. The studies we included  in our literature review were published between 2008 and 2018 and  included information relevant to our research objective on female  servicemember retention, attrition, or promotion.

From the group of 87 studies, we excluded 81 studies because they did  not meet our inclusion criteria or the results were deemed not relevant to  this review. The resulting six studies were further reviewed for content.

We conducted a content analysis in order to be able to summarize the  relevant results from the literature search by identifying recurring themes.  To conduct this content analysis, the team developed a list of six  overarching themes with three to seven sub-themes associated with each  main theme. The resultant 54 sub-themes were documented in the team’s  data collection instrument as a paired main theme and sub-theme. First,  an analyst recorded an assessment of whether the study included the  theme and sub-theme. A second analyst independently reviewed the  same information and recorded an assessment. The two analysts  reconciled their two independent assessments to produce the analysts’  consensus and recorded that consensus in the team’s final spreadsheet.  All results reported from the studies reviewed were found to be sufficiently  reliable for how they are used in this report and any limitations are  mentioned in the text.

For our third objective, we reviewed documentation on the Office of the  Secretary of Defense’s (OSD) and services’ efforts to collect and analyze  data on diversity in the department, as well as servicemember retention.  We reviewed the department’s plans for developing and promoting  diversity and inclusion in the force, including the department’s 2012-2017  Diversity and Inclusion Strategic Plan. We also reviewed a draft version  of the department’s forthcoming plan for 2019-2024 Diversity and  Inclusion Strategic Plan. We evaluated their efforts to determine whether  they met federal internal control standards, including that management  should design appropriate types of control activities such as defining  objectives clearly and helping ensure that terms are understood at all  levels. We reviewed other publications on female recruitment and  retention in the military, including reports and briefings developed by the  Defense Advisory Committee on Women in the Services (DACOWITS)  and the 2011 final report of the Military Leadership Diversity Commission  to determine what others had found and recommended with regard to  female retention and participation in the military. We also analyzed our  past reports and recommendations, for example, on military personnel  management and DOD’s Career Intermission Pilot Program, among  others.

For all three objectives, we also interviewed officials from the Office of  Military Personnel Policy Office and the Office for Diversity, Equity, and  Inclusion (ODEI), both under the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense  for Personnel and Readiness, as well as officials from the four military  services. We also interviewed representatives from DACOWITS and the  Service Women’s Action Network. Further, we reviewed previously  made recommendations by DACOWITS and the Military Leadership  Diversity Commission aimed at improving promotion and retention,  specifically of female servicemembers, and interviewed OSD officials  about any progress made by the department and the services to address  these recommendations.

We conducted this performance audit from September 2018 to May 2020  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.

Appendix III: Descriptive Statistics Data Tables

Tables 2 through 14 present snapshots of active-duty data from the  Defense Manpower Data Center, spanning the years of 2004 through  2018.

Appendix IV: Analysis and Comparison of Active-Duty Servicemember Separation with Characteristics

We developed a set of statistical models—all discrete time duration  analysis–using data from fiscal years 2004 through 2018, which  accounted for active-duty servicemembers’ time in service—that is, the  period of time from when they joined the military until their separation.  We controlled for specific servicemember characteristics such as gender,  branch of military service, pay grade, race or ethnicity, marital status, and  the existence of dependents to estimate the association of these  characteristics on the likelihood of active-duty servicemembers separating  from the service. Table 15 depicts the results of our analysis. Positive  numbers higher than 1.0 indicate the comparison group (e.g., married  female servicemembers without dependents) is more likely to separate  than the baseline group (e.g., unmarried female servicemembers without  dependents). Positive numbers lower than 1.0 indicate the comparison  group (e.g., female officers) is less likely to separate than the baseline  group (e.g., female enlisted).

Odds ratios from the duration analysis allow us to compare the relative  relationships between various characteristics and separation from the  military. For categorical variables, increase or decrease in the likelihood  of separation is in comparison to an omitted category, or reference  baseline group. Odds ratios that are statistically significant and greater  than 1.00 indicate that servicemembers with those characteristics are  more likely to separate than the baseline group. Odds ratio that are less  than 1.00 indicate that servicemembers with those characteristics are less  likely to separate. For example, the odds ratio for married female  servicemembers with dependents in the Air Force are 1.203. This implies  that the odds of separation for married female servicemembers with  dependents in the Air Force are 1.203 times the odds of separation for  unmarried female servicemembers without dependents in the Air Force,  holding other factors constant, or that the odds of separation for married  female servicemembers with dependents in the Air Force are about 20  percent higher than single female servicemembers without dependents in  the Air Force, if other conditions remain constant.

Appendix V: Comments from the Department of Defense

Appendix VI: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments

In addition to the contact named above, Kimberly Mayo (Assistant  Director), Jennifer Weber (Analyst in Charge), Adriana Aldgate, Emily  Biskup, Charles Culverwell, Edda Emmanuelli-Perez, Cynthia Grant,  Chad Hinsch, Yvonne Jones, Zina Merritt, Amie Lesser, Samuel Moore,  Moon Parks, Steven Putansu, Leigh Ann Sheffield, Michael Silver,  Pamela Snedden, Carter Stevens, Elaine Vaurio, and Lillian M. Yob made  key contributions to this report.

Military Personnel: Observations on the Department of Defense’s Career  Intermission Pilot Program. GAO-17-623R. Washington, D.C.: May 31,  2017.

Military Personnel: Oversight Framework and Evaluations Needed for  DOD and the Coast Guard to Help Increase the Number of Female  Officer Applicants. GAO-16-55. Washington, D.C.: November 13, 2015.

Military Personnel: DOD Should Develop a Plan to Evaluate the  Effectiveness of Its Career Intermission Pilot Program. GAO-16-35.  Washington, D.C.: October 27, 2015.

Military Personnel: DOD Is Expanding Combat Service Opportunities for  Women, but Should Monitor Long-Term Integration Progress.  GAO-15-589. Washington, D.C.: July 20, 2015.

Military Child Care: DOD Is Taking Actions to Address Awareness and  Availability Barriers. GAO-12-21. Washington, D.C.: February 3, 2012.

Women in the Military: Attrition and Retention. GAO/NSIAD-90-87BR.  Washington, D.C.: July 26, 1990.

We reviewed active duty female servicemember retention and promotion in FY 2004-2018.

The proportion of women in the military went up from 15.1% to 16.5%

Attrition rates for female enlisted and commissioned officers were higher than for males, but this gap has narrowed

Women were 28% more likely to leave the service than men

Promotion rates for enlisted were slightly lower for women than men, but officer promotion rates were higher for women

DOD doesn’t have guidance or plans for its efforts to recruit and retain women

Our 5 recommendations are to better guide and monitor DOD and military service efforts to recruit and retain women.