Defense Space Systems: DOD Should Collect and Maintain Data on Its Space Acquisition Workforce

DOD plans to spend about $65 billion from fiscal year 2019 to 2023 on space acquisition programs—including satellites, launch vehicles, ground components, and user equipment. DOD's space acquisition personnel perform a variety of activities, such as preparing and reviewing acquisition documents, to manage or oversee programs that develop or procure space capabilities. DOD recently announced it plans to establish a new Space Development Agency and a United States Space Command.

A House Report accompanying a bill for the 2017 National Defense Authorization Act contained a provision for GAO to review DOD's space acquisition workforce. This report examines, among other things, what is known about the size, mix, and location of that workforce. GAO collected data from DOD's acquisition workforce data systems and multiple space acquisition organizations. GAO interviewed officials from these organizations and from a non-generalizable sample of 10 space acquisition programs, representing a range of dollar values and stages in the acquisition process.

The Department of Defense (DOD) does not routinely monitor the size, mix, and location of its space acquisition workforce. However, data GAO collected and aggregated from multiple DOD space acquisition organizations show that at least 8,000 personnel in multiple locations nationwide were working on space acquisition activities at the end of 2017 (see figure). Also as shown, military and civilian personnel comprise the majority of the overall workforce, while contractor and Federally Funded Research and Development Center personnel also provide support.

Several factors hinder DOD's ability to collect data needed for a comprehensive view of its space acquisition workforce:

DOD does not maintain a complete list of its space acquisition programs;

DOD's workforce data systems are not configured to identify personnel working on space acquisition activities; and

DOD space acquisition personnel are dispersed across organizations and some personnel support both space and non-space programs.

Without complete and accurate data, DOD cannot assess gaps in the overall capabilities of the space acquisition workforce. Identifying space programs and collecting such data would also better position DOD to ensure that the appropriate space acquisition personnel are assigned to the new Space Development Agency and the United States Space Command. Finally, comprehensive data on the space acquisition workforce would also be beneficial to support DOD's efforts related to its recent legislative proposal regarding the establishment of the United States Space Force.

GAO recommends that DOD (1) identifies the universe of its space acquisition programs and the organizations that support them and (2) collects and maintains data on the workforce that supports these programs. DOD agreed with the first recommendation, but not the second. GAO revised the second recommendation to address DOD's concerns.

The Department of Defense (DOD) plans to spend more than $65 billion  from fiscal year 2019 to 2023 to acquire space systems that will provide  critical capabilities to support military and other government operations,  such as intelligence collection; battlefield surveillance and management;  communications; and positioning, navigation, and timing. Historically, the  military services and other DOD components, such as the Missile  Defense Agency, have developed space capabilities separately, and in  some cases collaboratively, to meet different warfighter needs, and each  has their own acquisition workforce to support these efforts.

Space programs and the acquisition functions necessary to develop them  have faced challenges over the years. We have previously found that  fragmentation and overlap in DOD space acquisition management and  oversight contributed to long-standing problems of cost overruns and  schedule delays. For example, we reported that the Global Positioning  System lacked a single authority responsible for synchronizing the  various functions that must occur for the system to operate effectively.  This diffused leadership contributed to a decade-long gap in the military’s  ability to use the updated Global Positioning System signal after its  satellites were launched. In December 2017, we found that the new  ground system—the Next Generation Operational Control System— remained at risk for further delays and cost growth, and that the Air Force  has begun a second new program to deliver an interim, limited capability.

DOD’s oversight of its space activities is evolving. In August 2018, DOD  announced plans to establish a consolidated Space Development Agency  intended to rapidly develop and field next generation space capabilities.

In December 2018, the President directed DOD to establish the United  States Space Command to integrate space capabilities across all  branches of the military, and improve and evolve space procedures and  techniques to assist the warfighter. In the February 2019 Space Policy  Directive, the President called for DOD to submit a legislative proposal to  establish a United States Space Force as a new armed service within the  Air Force.

The House Report accompanying a bill for the National Defense  Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 contained a provision for GAO to  review DOD’s space acquisition workforce. This report examines            (1) what DOD knows about the size, mix, and location of its space  acquisition workforce and (2) the challenges, if any, DOD faces in hiring,  staffing, and retaining space acquisition workforce personnel. We define  the space acquisition workforce broadly to include acquisition-coded  military and civilian personnel, as well as support contractor and Federally  Funded Research and Development Center (FFRDC) personnel that work  on space acquisition programs and related activities.

To assess what DOD knows about the size, mix, and location of its space  acquisition workforce, we reviewed DOD directives related to the  definition of space systems and the DOD acquisition workforce, and  interviewed pertinent DOD officials. We obtained available data, as of  December 31, 2017, from organizations that perform space acquisition  activities since DOD-wide comprehensive data were not available. We  interviewed the Directors of Acquisition Career Management from the  military services to identify space organizations, and then met with  officials from each organization to identify the current space acquisition  programs and obtain workforce data. Military and civilian personnel data  in the report reflect those personnel that spent 50 percent or more of their  work time on space acquisitions. Contractor and FFRDC personnel data  are presented in terms of the number of full-time equivalents and staff- years of technical effort equivalents, respectively. To assess the reliability  of these data, we discussed the data and sources used to compile the  data with DOD officials, reviewed the data for logical inconsistencies, and  compared the data when possible to other sources, such as DOD briefing  documents. We determined the data were sufficiently reliable to provide  estimates of the general size and mix of the space acquisition workforce.

To assess any challenges DOD faces in hiring, staffing, and retaining its  space acquisition workforce, we interviewed space acquisition officials  from multiple levels within DOD, the Air Force, the Army, and the Navy.  We also met with officials from a non-generalizable sample of 10 DOD  space acquisition programs. We selected these programs to present a  range of dollar values and different stages of the acquisition process. In  addition, we reviewed studies from DOD and elsewhere that discuss  space acquisitions and workforce challenges.

We conducted this performance audit from November 2017 to March  2019 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. Additional details on our  scope and methodology are provided in appendix I.

Space systems generally involve one of four types of interrelated  segments that are needed to make a space capability fully functional. As  illustrated in figure 1, they include (1) space components—namely the  satellites, (2) ground components, including satellite control systems and  data processing subsystems and facilities, (3) user equipment, such as  radios/terminals, needed by the warfighter to use the capability, and        (4) launch vehicles and facilities.

DOD space systems are acquired under the same acquisition policies as  other weapons systems. However, as we found in July 2016, space  systems are different from other acquisitions in some ways. For  example, space has more programs of joint interest than other areas, and  includes varied stakeholders, such as civil agencies and multiple  services. According to officials, in developing space systems once a  satellite is launched, if there are problems it is essentially impossible to  change the hardware, and software changes may not be an option. In  addition, space programs typically use cutting-edge technologies that  have to withstand the harsh space environment. Such technologies are  rarely available as off-the-shelf systems from the commercial market and  must be developed following a specific process overseen by specially- trained DOD acquisition personnel.

Data from the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and  Sustainment’s Office of Human Capital Initiatives show that, as of June  2018, DOD employed about 170,000 military and civilian personnel who  are designated as acquisition personnel and are responsible for acquiring  weapon systems, such as aircraft, ships, tanks, and space systems. DOD  tracks the characteristics, education, training, and experience of these  acquisition personnel in DOD’s acquisition workforce data system—Data  Mart—where they are tracked as belonging to 1 of 15 acquisition career  fields. Table 1 shows a list of these acquisition career fields.

Contractor and FFRDC personnel often support DOD acquisition efforts.  For the purpose of this report, “contractor” refers to support service  contractors who provide technical and administrative support rather than  prime contractors who develop and produce weapon systems or  products. FFRDCs are not-for-profit entities sponsored and funded  primarily by DOD to fulfill research and development, engineering, and  analytic needs that cannot be met as effectively by existing government  or contractor personnel. Nonprofit, university-affiliated, or private industry  organizations operate the FFRDCs through contracts or other  agreements with federal agencies. DOD procures FFRDC services by  staff years of technical effort. The total amount of FFRDC services time  that DOD is permitted to obtain is set annually by Congress. For fiscal  year 2018, DOD was authorized to use available funds for FFRDCs for  not more than 6,030 staff years of technical effort. Authorized staff years  of technical effort are allocated among the military services’ organizations  that act as the primary sponsors for each FFRDC, which then prioritize  what work the FFRDC will perform according to the allocation level  received. In general, managers in the contractor and FFRDC  organizations direct the daily activities of their respective personnel, while  DOD military and civilian personnel oversee their work.

Over the years, GAO has highlighted the importance of workforce  management. Since 2001, GAO has included strategic human capital  management as a government-wide high-risk area. More recently, we  found that having the right workforce mix with the right skill sets is critical  to achieving DOD’s mission, and that it is important for DOD, as part of its  strategic workforce planning, to conduct gap analyses of its critical skills  and competencies. Strategic workforce planning—an integral part of  human capital management—is an iterative, systematic process that  helps organizations determine if they have staff with the necessary skills  and competencies to accomplish their strategic goals. As shown in table  2, many DOD offices play key roles in strategic workforce planning  activities.

DOD Lacks Comprehensive Data on Its Space Acquisition Workforce, but Information Indicates That It Includes at Least 8,000 Personnel

DOD does not have comprehensive information about its space  acquisition workforce—including the size, mix, and location of this  workforce. DOD does not have this information because, among other  things, DOD has not clearly identified its space programs, and its  workforce data systems are not configured to identify space acquisition  personnel. In the absence of comprehensive DOD data, we sought to  obtain an understanding of the extent of this workforce. We aggregated  data from individual DOD organizations and estimate that at least 8,000  military, civilian, contractor, and FFRDC personnel were working on  space acquisitions in multiple locations across the United States at the  end of 2017. While this information represents only a snapshot in time, it  provides insight into the extent of the space acquisition workforce. Given  DOD’s recent decision to stand up a United States Space Command and  to establish a consolidated Space Development Agency in 2019, along  with the President’s directive for DOD to submit a legislative proposal for  a United States Space Force, having knowledge about which personnel  are involved with military space acquisitions and where these personnel  are located will be important to DOD’s planning efforts.

DOD Does Not Collect and Maintain Comprehensive Information on the Space Acquisition Workforce

DOD collects data on its acquisition workforce, but does not collect and  maintain comprehensive and complete data on the size, mix, and location  of the military, civilian, contractor, and FFRDC personnel working on  space acquisitions. According to the military services’ Directors of  Acquisition Career Management, DOD manages its acquisition workforce  by career field, such as program management and engineering, and not  by the type of product being acquired, such as space systems. They told  us that, in their view, the acquisition skills needed for an acquisition  program—such as those for program management, engineering, and  contracting—are largely the same regardless of the product type.  However, officials acknowledged that it takes some time for personnel to  learn the nuances of acquiring a specific type of product.

We identified three factors that hinder DOD’s ability to collect  comprehensive data on its space acquisition workforce. Together, they  impede DOD from maintaining a complete and accurate understanding of  the size, mix, and location of its space acquisition workforce.

DOD does not maintain a complete list of its space acquisition  programs. Officials from the office of the Assistant Secretary of the Air  Force for Acquisition and the service-level acquisition career managers  told us that DOD does not maintain a list of the universe of space  acquisition programs. In addition, the budget document that DOD submits  to Congress specific to space programs, which could possibly serve as  an alternative source of such information, identifies programs that have  large amounts of funding by name, but aggregates information for smaller  programs without identifying them individually.

While DOD does not maintain a complete list of space acquisition  programs, during the course of our review we found that the military  services were generally able to identify space acquisition programs. DOD  does have a definition of space systems. Specifically, according to a DOD  Directive, space systems include all systems related to making a space  capability operational—that is programs acquiring satellites, satellite  ground systems (including satellite control and data processing),  receivers/user segments (including terminals and radios), and launch  systems—but specifies that terminals that are embedded as part of a  platform (i.e. aircraft, ship, or tank) are excluded. However, DOD  officials had difficulty identifying some programs, particularly those in the  user segment. For example, the Air Force’s Space Fence program, which  is developing ground radar as a part of the space surveillance network  that detects and tracks space objects, is included as a space program in  DOD’s budget documents. Officials from the Program Executive Office  that staffs personnel to the program initially told us they did not consider it  a space program since it is a series of ground-based radars. They  subsequently determined that it is a space program since the radar will  track space objects and provide data for space situational awareness.

DOD data systems are not currently configured to identify space  acquisition personnel. We examined three data sources that have  information on the different personnel groups in the acquisition workforce,  and found that none of them can identify space acquisition personnel.

The Office of Human Capital Initiatives within the Office of the  Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment uses  the Data Mart system to track the education, experience, and  training of military and civilian acquisition-coded personnel  working in the 15 acquisition functional career fields shown in  table 1. DOD has taken periodic steps to enhance the data  captured in this system. For example, in 2009 DOD began  tracking whether acquisition personnel in the business career field  were working on financial management or cost estimating. In  2014, DOD started to track personnel with expertise in contracting  with small businesses, and expanded its efforts to track personnel  with expertise in international acquisitions. However, this system  does not currently identify personnel staffed to or supporting  space acquisitions or any other type of product acquisition.

The Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and  Readiness tracks contractor data using the Enterprise-wide  Contractor Manpower Reporting Application system to provide  DOD management information on contracted services obtained by  each military service and defense agency. The system includes  data on the number of hours of service each contractor provides  to the government, which could be used to approximate the  number of contractor personnel used to perform the work.  However, the system does not track the type of acquisition  programs being supported, such as space acquisition programs.  In addition, the data are self-reported by service contractors and  concerns exist regarding potential underreporting. For example,  we reported in March 2018 that the military services estimated  that the Enterprise-wide Contractor Manpower Reporting  Application included fiscal year 2016 contractor data for 80  percent of Army contracts and 75 percent of Navy contracts; the  percentage of Air Force contracts was unknown.

The Director of Laboratories and Personnel within the Office of the  Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering tracks  information on FFRDCs, such as the staff years of technical effort  provided each year, to ensure that DOD stays within its  congressionally mandated limit. Each FFRDC sponsor  organization provides an annual report of their staff years of  technical effort and funding to DOD. However, DOD officials told  us that sponsoring organizations do not identify what type of  acquisition program their respective FFRDC personnel support,  such as space acquisition programs.

Personnel supporting space acquisitions are dispersed across a  variety of organizations and may also support non-space programs.  Each of the military services we reviewed has program executive offices,  research labs, or other organizations that support both space and non- space acquisitions. DOD officials told us that functional career field  leaders in each of the organizations, such as the engineering or the  contracting directorates, assign personnel to space or non-space  programs on an as-needed basis, which could make it difficult for DOD to  determine which and how many personnel should be included in the  space acquisition workforce. Five of the 10 space acquisition programs  we reviewed—1 Air Force, 1 Navy, and 3 Army—were managed by  organizations that were primarily responsible for developing and  acquiring non-space programs.

Air Force—The Space Fence program is staffed by the Air Force  Life Cycle Management Center’s Program Executive Office for  Battle Management. The Center primarily supports non-space  programs, such as fighters, bombers, tankers, and presidential  aircraft.

Navy—The Mobile User Objective System is managed by the  Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command, which primarily  manages non-space programs that provide enterprise information  system and command, control, communications, computers, and  intelligence capabilities.

Army—The Joint Tactical Ground Station program is managed by  the Army’s Program Executive Office for Missiles and Space. The  office primarily manages a variety of missile programs—such as  close combat, cruise, and integrated air and missile defense  programs—that are non-space programs. Similarly, the Secure,  Mobile, Anti-Jam, Reliable, Tactical-Terminal and the  Transportable Tactical Command Communications programs are  managed by the Army’s Program Executive Office for Command,  Control, Communications-Tactical. This office primarily manages a  variety of information systems to provide tactical communication  for the service, which may or may not be space programs.  Officials told us that the three Army programs we reviewed were  also supported by other, separate Army organizations, such as the  Army Contracting Command for contracting support; the Army’s  Aviation and Missile Research, Development, and Engineering  Center for engineering support; and the Army Materiel Command  for logistics support. These organizations provide support to space  and non-space programs on an as-needed basis.

The Administration, Congress, and DOD are discussing a variety of  approaches for strengthening the government’s space operations,  including the establishment of one or more new organizations. In June  2018 the President directed DOD to begin the process of establishing a  new military branch focused on space that is separate from and equal to  the other military departments, Army, Navy, and Air Force. In an August  2018 report to the Congress on the organizational and management  structure needed for the national space components, DOD described the  immediate steps that it plans to take to implement the President’s  direction while waiting for Congressional authorization to create the new  military branch. These steps include establishing a new United States  Space Command to further its space warfighting capabilities, as well as  developing plans to establish a consolidated Space Development Agency  to rapidly develop and field next generation space capabilities. DOD has  described the general areas of focus planned for these new  organizations; however, many specifics are still to be determined. DOD  has announced that a committee of senior DOD leaders is expected to  identify which of the current space activities will be consolidated into  these new space organizations. In addition, the President’s February  2019 Space Policy Directive now requires DOD to submit a legislative  proposal to establish a United States Space Force as a new armed  service within the Air Force. DOD announced it delivered a legislative  proposal to Congress on March 1, 2019.

The lack of comprehensive information about DOD’s space programs and  the acquisition personnel supporting those programs affects DOD’s ability  to assess gaps in the overall capabilities of its space acquisition  workforce and determine whether it has sufficient internal capability and  critical knowledge or skills for its space acquisitions. Moreover, it hampers  DOD’s ability to make decisions related to establishing the United States  Space Command, a new Space Development Agency, or potentially the  United States Space Force. This includes determining the appropriate  number and mix of acquisition personnel that are needed for the new  organizations, as well as which military and civilian personnel should be  assigned to them. According to federal internal control standards, an  agency, such as DOD, should have relevant, reliable, and timely  information in order to run and control operations, including managing the  workforce. Air Force Director of Acquisition Career Management  officials stated that having a process for identifying space acquisitions  personnel would be beneficial. As we reported in July 2003, the success  of merging personnel during organizational transformations is more likely  when the best individuals are selected to meet the skills and  competencies needed for the new organization’s goals.

GAO Identified at Least 8,000 Personnel in Over 20 Locations As Part of DOD’s Space Acquisition Workforce

In the absence of readily available comprehensive data from DOD, we  collected and aggregated data from multiple DOD space organizations  and found that at least 8,000 personnel were in the space acquisition  workforce at the end of 2017. However, our data set is not complete.  For example, the National Reconnaissance Office, which DOD officials  told us has a significant number of personnel working on space  acquisitions, is not included in our analysis. In addition, our count only  includes personnel that spent 50 percent or more of their time working on  space acquisitions; therefore any personnel who spent less than 50  percent of their time on space acquisitions was not included.  Furthermore, it is important to note that our data provide a snapshot of  the workforce as of December 31, 2017. According to DOD officials, the  size and mix of the workforce can change based on the number of  programs and where programs are in the acquisition process. The military  and civilian personnel data we collected are expressed as number of  people. The contractor and FFRDC personnel data are expressed as  full-time equivalents and staff-years of technical effort equivalents,  respectively.

Size of Workforce: Based on data we collected from multiple DOD  space acquisition organizations, at least 8,000 military, civilian,  contractor, and FFRDC personnel supported DOD’s space acquisitions  as of December 31, 2017 (see figure 2).

Military and civilian personnel comprised about 64 percent of the total  space acquisition workforce, the vast majority of which support Air Force  acquisitions. The remaining 36 percent of the workforce is contractor and  FFRDC personnel that support DOD’s space acquisition activities. The Air  Force has the largest number of military and civilian personnel because  the Air Force has primarily been responsible for DOD’s space acquisitions  and develops programs for all four segments of space capability,  including launch services for the most critical national security space  satellites. The Navy is responsible for systems that provide satellite  communications across DOD as well as its user segments, while the  Army and other DOD components primarily focus their efforts on  developing their user segment systems or other space-related projects.

Workforce Mix: Based on data we collected from multiple DOD space  acquisition organizations, the mix of military, civilian, contractor, and  FFRDC personnel that each military service and agency had supporting  their respective space acquisition programs varied considerably (see  figure 3).

Military and civilian personnel comprised between 54 and 63 percent of  the Air Force’s, Army’s, and Navy’s space acquisition workforce and 94  percent of the other DOD components’ workforces. Contractors and  FFRDC personnel made up the remainder of the workforce. The Air Force  relies more heavily on FFRDC personnel as a percentage of its workforce  than the Army, Navy, and other DOD components. According to Air Force  officials, the Space and Missile Systems Center—the Air Force’s major  space acquisition organization—has relied heavily on FFRDC support for  space engineering and technical expertise since its founding in the 1950s.  The Army and Navy primarily rely on contractors for their remaining  support. These contractors mainly provide technical expertise, such as  engineering services, to support military and civilian personnel. Some  contractors also support program management and business and  administration activities, such as cost estimating. Figure 4 provides  detailed examples of how personnel support two space acquisition  programs included in our review.

Locations of Workforce: Based on data we collected from multiple DOD  space acquisition organizations, space acquisition personnel work at over  20 organizations located across the United States. Figure 5 shows the  primary locations of DOD’s space acquisition organizations.

About 45 percent of the overall space acquisition workforce is located at  the Air Force Space and Missile Systems Center in Los Angeles,  California. The Army space acquisition workforce is located primarily at  Redstone Arsenal in Huntsville, Alabama, and Aberdeen Proving Ground,  Maryland. The Navy space acquisition workforce is located at the Space  and Naval Warfare Systems Command in San Diego, California, and a  few other locations.

DOD Faces Challenges Hiring, Assigning, and Retaining Qualified Personnel to Work on Space Acquisition Programs, but Is Taking Steps to Address These Challenges

DOD faces several challenges related to hiring, assigning, and retaining  qualified personnel to work on space acquisition programs, similar to the  challenges it faces more generally with the acquisition workforce.  However, some of the challenges are magnified because almost half of  the military and civilian space acquisition workforce is concentrated in Los  Angeles, California, which has a higher cost of living than many other  areas in the United States, and where competition with private industry for  personnel with space acquisition experience is high. DOD is taking steps  to address these challenges where possible.

DOD Faces Challenges Hiring Qualified Candidates, but Is Taking Steps to Address Them

DOD officials told us that one of the primary workforce challenges DOD  faces is its ability to hire qualified people to work on space acquisitions.  They said that DOD is competing with private industry and other federal  agencies for top talent in several acquisition career fields.

Attracting Candidates with Technical Expertise. DOD officials stated  that it is particularly difficult to attract people with certain technical  expertise, such as cybersecurity and systems engineering, because they  are in high demand in both government and private industry. Air Force  officials said the government cannot match the salaries offered by  industry. For example, the Launch and Test Range System program  office told us that a shortage of trained and qualified cybersecurity  personnel exists both within the government and industry. Our prior work  has described how maintaining cybersecurity personnel is a challenge  government-wide, and that, according to DOD officials, even when DOD  cybersecurity positions are filled, it may not necessarily be with the right  expertise since it is a specialized area.

Hiring in Areas with Higher Costs of Living. Air Force officials at the  Space and Missile Systems Center said that hiring challenges are further  exacerbated for space acquisition organizations that are located in areas  with higher costs of living. They said, for example, that prospective  employees often visit the center in Los Angeles, California, and, after  assessing the local cost of living, decide not to accept a job offer.

DOD is taking steps to address its hiring challenges.

To address difficulties in obtaining personnel with sufficient technical  experience, some officials told us that they typically hire the best  candidate available—who may lack some of the desired technical skills— and provide them with on-the-job and formal training to increase their  technical knowledge and skills.

To better compete with higher salaries offered by other potential  employers, several officials told us they offer tuition reimbursement as a  recruiting incentive.

Air Force officials told us that in areas with higher costs of living they  focus their recruiting efforts on the local area because local candidates  already understand the higher costs of living challenges for the area and  are more likely to have support systems in place to manage such costs.

DOD Faces Challenges Assigning Experienced Personnel to Space Acquisition Programs, but Is Taking Steps to Address Them

Beyond the concerns expressed about hiring personnel, Air Force Space  and Missile Systems Center officials expressed concerns that some  functional areas within the space acquisition workforce face challenges  assigning experienced personnel—personnel with the appropriate  knowledge and skill set to perform the work—that are already hired to  space acquisition programs. For example, contracting career field officials  at the center noted that the space acquisition workforce does not have  enough mid-level personnel who understand the detailed steps and  documentation required in the acquisition process. In particular, the Air  Force Space and Missile Systems Center reported that at the end of  January 2018, the number of mid-level civilian and military personnel  working in the contracting functional career field was 50 less than the  number authorized. According to contracting career field officials at the  center, a large number of mid-level procurement contracting officer  positions were vacant, and senior procurement managers were picking up  the corresponding workloads rather than performing their staff  development and strategic planning tasks.

Furthermore, officials from the Air Force’s Space and Missile Systems  Center program management functional office also expressed concern  that the bulk of the military personnel assigned to the program  management positions were more junior in rank than the Center was  authorized by the Air Force to obtain. Figure 6 shows the level of the Air  Force Space and Missile Systems Center personnel that filled its program  management positions as of January 2018. Junior officers typically have  less experience managing acquisition programs than more senior officers.

The military services are taking steps to manage the effects of military  and civilian personnel skills and experience gaps, to some degree, by  having contractor personnel perform the work. For example, the Air Force  Space and Missile Systems Center’s contracting functional office used  four contractor personnel to support its pricing work.

DOD Faces Challenges Retaining Experienced Personnel in Space Acquisitions, but Is Taking Steps to Address Them

DOD has also experienced challenges with retaining some space  acquisition personnel, especially those within their first few years of  joining federal government service that had obtained certain acquisition- related experience or authorities. For example, contracting career field  officials at the Air Force Space and Missile Systems Center said that they  have difficulty retaining contracting officers once they receive their  contract warrant authority because they can obtain a higher  compensation package from private industry companies. Receiving  contract warrant authority is considered an indication that the individual  gained sufficient skills and experience to be able to perform the work  involved in writing, awarding, and managing contracts. Officials also  stated that some personnel leave after obtaining security clearances  required to perform their work because private companies working on  government contracts pay more to qualified individuals with clearances.

Officials from the Air Force Space and Missile Systems Center and Army  Space and Missile Defense Command also told us that they have  difficulty retaining engineers. They said some engineers have left  because they were not satisfied with being used as generalists to oversee  the work of FFRDC or contractor personnel, rather than being used to  perform hands-on engineering work. Officials also stated that this  situation is not unique to space acquisitions—government engineers  seldom get to design, develop, or build systems as the hands-on  engineering work is primarily performed by prime contractors. Air Force  Space and Missile Systems Center officials said they are trying to help  the government engineers understand how to influence decisions and be  more effective in working as part of the space engineering acquisition  team, which would include military, civilian, contractor, and FFRDC  personnel.

Officials from various functional career fields at these Air Force and Army  locations noted that limited promotion opportunities for civilian personnel  in space acquisitions also cause retention challenges. For example, the  Air Force Space and Missile System Center has 53 management  (General Schedule 15) positions; however, Center officials told us that the  turnover rate for these higher-level positions is low. Officials reported that  some mid-level program management personnel seek and accept  promotions at other non-space acquisition offices or in other geographical  locations that have more promotion opportunities.

Some Air Force Space and Missile Systems Center and Army officials  noted that retention incentives are used to help retain staff. This includes  student loan repayments, and recognition incentives, such as monetary or  time-off awards tied to performance. Air Force Space and Missile  Systems Center officials also said that they are working to realign current  civilian acquisition personnel at the center under the Civilian Acquisition  Workforce Demonstration project, which they believe will help attract,  retain, and motivate high-quality civilian personnel for the acquisition  workforce.

DOD space systems and the personnel who work to acquire them remain  critical components of national security and key resources. As DOD takes  steps toward establishing the United States Space Command, its Space  Development Agency, and potentially the United States Space Force, it  will be essential to understand the size, mix, and location of the space  acquisition workforce. However, DOD does not collect and maintain this  type of comprehensive data on its space acquisition workforce. Although  we were able to pull together information on the space acquisition  workforce, the data represent a snapshot of the workforce at one point in  time, and are not complete since acquisition personnel working on  National Reconnaissance Office space programs and those who spent  less than 50 percent of their time working on space acquisitions were not  included.

Taking steps to identify and routinely track accurate information on space  acquisition programs and the organizations and personnel that support  those programs would provide several benefits to DOD. In particular, it  would better position DOD to assess whether it has the appropriate  number and mix of military, civilian, contractor, and FFRDC personnel  working on space acquisitions and to make adjustments if necessary.  Further, it would better position DOD to make decisions on which  acquisition personnel will support or transition into the United States  Space Command or the new Space Development Agency, since DOD  has not clearly defined what acquisition functions may or may not be  handled by these new organizations. Finally, comprehensive data on the  space acquisition workforce would also be beneficial to support DOD’s  development of its legislative proposal regarding the establishment of the  United States Space Force.

We are making the following two recommendations to DOD:  The Secretary of Defense should direct the military services and other  DOD components to identify the universe of space acquisition programs,  as well as the various organizations that support these programs, and  report this information to Congress. In doing so, DOD should implement  procedures to maintain and periodically update the list. (Recommendation  1)

The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, in  conjunction with the Under Secretaries of Defense for Research and  Development and for Personnel and Readiness, should collect and  maintain data on acquisition-coded military and civilian personnel that  support space acquisition programs and related activities—including  those that may do so less than full time—as well as track the contractor  and FFRDC workforce general levels of effort supporting space  acquisition programs and related activities and the total resources  annually committed to perform that work. (Recommendation 2)

We provided a draft of this report to DOD for review and comment. DOD  provided written comments (reproduced in appendix II) on our draft  report. In those comments, DOD concurred with our first recommendation  to identify the universe of space acquisition programs, as well as the  various organizations that support these programs, and report this  information to Congress. DOD did not concur with our draft second  recommendation to collect and maintain data on the space acquisition  workforce. DOD stated that the manner in which personnel data are  captured in its human resource and development systems makes it  difficult to identify, collect, and maintain data on the military and civilian  personnel working on space acquisition programs. Further, DOD raised  concerns over contractual limitations on collecting and maintaining data  on contractor and FFRDC personnel supporting space acquisitions. In  light of these concerns, we made changes to the draft recommendation.  We believe the language of our final recommendation will better facilitate  implementation by DOD.

With regard to our second recommendation, we continue to believe that  taking steps to identify military and civilian personnel supporting space  acquisition programs would support DOD’s strategic workforce planning,  particularly considering DOD’s recent legislative proposal for establishing  the United States Space Force. For example, we acknowledge that the  current personnel data system used to track military and civilian  acquisition personnel has limitations, but we believe taking steps to make  minor modifications to the system to facilitate identifying and routinely  tracking accurate information on these two segments of the space  acquisition workforce would provide several benefits to DOD. Most  importantly, it would help DOD make decisions on how many and which  military and civilian acquisition personnel should be assigned to the new  space organizations—namely the Space Development Agency, the  United States Space Command, and the United States Space Force. With  regard to DOD’s comment that our recommendations do not recognize  that DOD personnel have been shifted into and out of space acquisition  programs, we recognize that acquisition personnel have been moved  across programs and support space and non-space acquisitions.  However, we continue to believe that DOD should have better information  on military and civilian acquisition personnel. In particular, knowing which  personnel have space acquisition backgrounds could enhance the  productivity and effectiveness of DOD’s space acquisition efforts. As a  result, we did not make a change to our second recommendation as it  relates to military and civilian space acquisition personnel.

However, in consideration of the concerns raised by DOD about tracking  data on contractor and FFRDC personnel who are supporting space  acquisition activities, we modified our second recommendation. It was not  our intention to have DOD undertake significant modifications to the  relevant contracts to obtain data on these segments of the space  acquisition workforce.  However, understanding the extent to which space  acquisition programs rely on contractor and FFRDC personnel for support  could be useful in helping DOD determine the right number and mix of  military and civilian personnel needed in the new space organizations. As  a result, we modified the language of our second recommendation to  focus on tracking the contractor and FFRDC workforce general levels of  effort supporting space acquisition activities and the resources spent to  obtain this assistance, rather than—as we stated in our draft  recommendation—tracking the individuals who perform such work.  However, we continue to believe that collecting and maintaining more  robust data on that workforce will support DOD’s planning efforts and  better inform Congress.

DOD also expressed concern that our report may be equating statements  of officials at the staff- and operational-level to military service- and DOD- level officials. We reviewed statements attributed to DOD officials  throughout our report. Where necessary, we clarified attributions to better  reflect the appropriate level of the officials with whom we discussed the  corresponding information during our review.

DOD also provided technical comments on our draft report, which we  incorporated as appropriate.

We are sending copies of this report to the appropriate congressional  committees; the Acting Secretary of Defense; and the Secretaries of the  Air Force, Army, and Navy. In addition, the report will be available at no  charge on GAO’s website at http://www.gao.gov.

If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please contact  me at (202) 512-4841 or ludwigsonj@gao.gov. Contact points for our  Office 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 III.

Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

A House Report related to the National Defense Authorization Act of  Fiscal Year 2017 contained a provision for GAO to review the current  state of the Department of Defense’s (DOD) space systems acquisition  workforce. This report examines (1) what DOD knows about the size,  mix, and location of its space acquisition workforce, and (2) the  challenges, if any, DOD faces in hiring, staffing, and retaining space  acquisition workforce personnel. For the purpose of this report, we  defined the space acquisition workforce broadly to include military,  civilian, contractor, and Federally Funded Research and Development  Center (FFRDC) personnel working on space acquisition programs and  related efforts.

To determine what DOD knows about the size, mix, and location of the  space acquisition workforce, we met with officials from DOD’s Office of  Human Capital Initiatives, the Air Force, the Army, the Navy, and 4th  Estate’s Director of Acquisition Career Management to obtain information  that is collected on the space acquisition workforce. We were told by each  of these officials that DOD does not have a group of personnel officially  designated as the space acquisition workforce. They stated that DOD has  separate mechanisms for collecting military, civilian, contractor, and  FFRDC workforce data and that none of these systems contained the  level of granularity we would need to identify all personnel working on  space acquisitions. Specifically, the sources we discussed were DOD’s  Data Mart system, a central repository for military and civilian acquisition  workforce data, as well as workforce data systems maintained by DOD  components that feed into the Data Mart system; the Enterprise-wide  Contractor Manpower Reporting Application system for contractor  services data; and FFRDC data maintained by military components.

We collected data on the size, mix, and location of the space acquisition  workforce from the space organizations performing space acquisition  activities. The Directors of Acquisition Career Management for the military  services and the 4th Estate defense agencies provided a list of  organizations that could be working on space acquisitions based on  DOD’s 2017 space system definition, which states that a space system  includes all areas related to making a space capability operational—that  is programs acquiring satellites, satellite ground systems (including  satellite control and data processing), receivers/user segments (including terminals and radios), and launch systems. It also specifies that terminals  are included unless they are embedded as part of a platform (i.e., aircraft,  ship, or tank).

We contacted each of the identified space organizations to verify that they  had personnel working on space acquisitions based on this definition.  Three of the organizations we originally contacted stated their  organizations did not work on any space acquisition programs based on  the definition. We did not include these organizations in our data  gathering efforts. We also identified other organizations that worked on  space acquisitions through discussions with acquisition management  officials from the Army and included these organizations in our data  gathering efforts. We asked each space organization to identify the  number of military and civilian personnel working on space acquisition  activities for 50 percent or more of their work time as of December 31,  2017. We used the threshold of 50 percent or more of the time to be  consistent with the DOD definition of the acquisition workforce, which  requires personnel to work 50 percent or more of their work time on  acquisition activities to be counted as part of that workforce. DOD officials  could not identify the number of contractor and FFRDC personnel working  on space acquisitions. Therefore, for contractor and FFRDC personnel,  we asked for the number of full-time equivalencies and staff-years of  technical effort equivalencies, respectively, provided as support to space  acquisitions. We requested that the personnel data be categorized by  acquisition career field.

We collected data from each DOD component as follows:  The Air Force Director of Acquisition Career Management provided  military and civilian workforce data from the Air Force’s Acquisition Career  Management System that feeds into Data Mart for all Air Force  organizations where the entire organization works on space acquisitions.  These organizations were the Air Force Space Command and the  Networks Family of Advanced Beyond Line of Sight Terminals Division  within the Air Force Life Cycle Management Center’s Program Executive  Office for Command, Control, Communications, Intelligence and  Networks. The Deputy Director identified other space programs that are  managed by the Air Force Life Cycle Management Center, but could not  identify which military and civilian personnel were supporting those  programs because the workforce data system is not configured to identify  personnel by product types. In addition, the Deputy Director could not  provide data on the number of contractor or FFRDC personnel working on  any space acquisition program. We contacted these organizations directly  to collect additional military, civilian, contractor and FFRDC workforce  data:

Air Force Space and Missile Systems Center;

Program Executive Office Command, Control, Communications,

Program Executive Office Battle Management; and

These organizations provided personnel data from their respective  manpower sources, such as personnel data systems or manning  documents.

To assess the reliability of the data, we discussed the data and sources  used to compile the data with Air Force officials; reviewed the data for  logical inconsistencies; compared the data received from the Air Force  workforce data system to data from Air Force Space and Missile Systems  Center briefing documents; and compared relevant data received from  individual space organizations with data from the Air Force Research  Laboratory Space Vehicle Directorate.

We collected military, civilian, contractor and FFRDC workforce data  directly from the following Army organizations performing space  acquisition activities:

Program Executive Office Missiles and Space;

Program Executive Office Command, Control and

Program Executive Office Intelligence, Electronic Warfare and  Sensors;

Communications-Electronics Research, Development and

U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Research Development and

To assess data reliability, we discussed the data and sources used to  compile the data with Army officials, and reviewed the data for logical  inconsistencies.

We collected military, civilian, contractor and FFRDC workforce data  directly from the following Navy organizations:

Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command;

Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center Pacific; and

Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center Atlantic.

The Naval Research Laboratory and the Navy’s Program Executive Office  for Command, Control, Communications, Computers and Intelligence  were originally identified as performing space acquisition activities;  however, officials stated they did not have any personnel working on  space acquisition activities for at least 50 percent of their time.

To assess data reliability, we discussed the data and sources used to  compile the data with Navy officials, and reviewed the data for logical  inconsistencies.

We collected military, civilian, contractor, and FFRDC workforce data  directly from:

To assess data reliability, we obtained information on the data and  sources used to compile the data with the agencies’ officials and  reviewed the data for logical inconsistencies.

The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency was originally  identified as performing space acquisition activities; however, officials  stated they did not have any personnel working on space acquisition  activities for at least 50 percent of their time.

We determined the workforce data were sufficiently reliable to provide  estimates of the general size and mix of the space acquisition workforce.

To assess any challenges DOD faces in hiring, staffing, and retaining its  space acquisition workforce, we interviewed officials from multiple levels  within DOD and the Air Force, Army and Navy. In addition to discussing  the challenges with the majority of the military service space  organizations listed above, we also met with the following DOD  organizations:

Office of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation; and

To gather additional insight into the challenges faced at the program  office level, we also interviewed officials from a non-generalizable sample  of 10 space acquisition programs from the Air Force, Army, and Navy.  The selected programs included different types of space acquisitions— such as satellites and launch systems—with a range of dollar values and  phases of acquisition. During our review, the Air Force and Army had  other space acquisition programs in addition to the ones we selected,  whereas the Navy had one space acquisition program according to  service officials. The selected programs from each military service  included:

Advanced Extremely High Frequency (space segment)

Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (launch segment)

Launch and Test Range System (launch segment)

Protected Tactical Enterprise Service (ground segment)

United States Nuclear Detonation Detection System (ground  segment)

Joint Tactical Ground Station (ground system)

Secure, Mobile, Anti-Jam, Reliable, Tactical–Terminal (user  segment)

Transportable Tactical Command Communications (user  segment)

Mobile User Objective System (space segment)

We also reviewed prior DOD and other space acquisition studies,  including reports from the Defense Science Board, Institute for Defense  Analyses, Office of Management and Budget, and the RAND Corporation.

Appendix II: Comments from the Department of Defense

Appendix III: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgements

Jon Ludwigson (202) 512-4841 or ludwigsonj@gao.gov.

In addition to the contact named above, Cheryl K. Andrew (Assistant  Director), Peter W. Anderson, R. Eli DeVan, Lorraine R. Ettaro, Lisa L.  Fisher, Miranda Riemer, Anne Louise Taylor, and Lauren M. Wright made  key contributions to this report.

DOD plans to spend about $65 billion through 2023 on satellites, launch vehicles, ground control facilities, and other space-related acquisitions. Recently, DOD was directed to submit a legislative proposal to establish the U.S. Space Force.

Does DOD know whether it has the right workforce to handle all of these expensive and complex acquisitions?

We found that DOD does not routinely monitor the size, mix, or location of the military and civilian workforce supporting its space-related acquisition programs.

We recommended, among other things, that DOD collect comprehensive data on its space programs acquisition workforce.