●

- Addressed

◐

- Partially Addressed

○

- Not Addressed

◉

- Consolidated or Other

℗

- Pending

⊘

- Closed-Partially Addressed

⊗

- Closed-Not Addressed

Year Identified: 2014

Area Number: 5

Area Type: Fragmentation, Overlap & Duplication

Action:

The Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Air Force and direct the Commander, U.S. Pacific Command, or the appropriate departmental entity in light of any reorganization, to negotiate a new memorandum of agreement between the Life Sciences Equipment Laboratory (LSEL) and Joint Prisoner of War/Missing in Action Accounting Command (JPAC). The memorandum should specify which conflicts' artifacts JPAC should send to the LSEL for analysis, the type of artifacts sent, and the priorities according to which the LSEL should analyze resolved cases.

Progress:

As of January 2020, some progress had been made in dividing up responsibilities for accounting for missing persons among the different laboratories, as GAO recommended in July 2013, but these efforts were not complete. Officials from the Defense POW/MIA Accounting Agency (DPAA) stated that the LSEL and the former JPAC Central Identification Laboratory (CIL) were absorbed into DPAA, so there is no need for a separate memorandum between the two entities because those organizations no longer exist. GAO believes that DPAA should take actions that would meet the intent of this recommendation by delineating the roles and responsibilities within DPAA of the former LSEL and CIL laboratories. DPAA has made some progress in doing this. For example, according to DPAA officials, DPAA updated the standard operating procedures for its laboratories to specify the format and procedures for writing life science equipment material evidence reports, and DPAA made progress in bringing the former LSEL up to the standard of the other laboratories by developing an evidence control system and a formal inventory.

However, a July 2018 Department of Defense Inspector General report stated that due to poor communication among DPAA's labs, the staff at the former LSEL continued to work on closed cases and completed summary reports that were not included in final case reports, among other issues. The Director of DPAA disagreed with the report's recommendation that the Director of DPAA reevaluate the roles and responsibilities of LSEL. In response to the DPAA comments, the Inspector General's report stated there was a need for the DPAA Director to ensure that the former LSEL's capabilities are adequately and appropriately incorporated in policies and procedures.

In January 2020, a DPAA laboratory official explained that DPAA distributes work across all the laboratories to meet agency demands. The official noted that the staff at the former LSEL lab had been sent artifacts to analyze from multiple conflicts and were integrated into broader material evidence workflows and the agency’s deployment schedule to provide support in the field. While these positive steps appear to address the issues GAO identified, the most recent version of the DPAA Laboratory standard operating procedures, from August 2019, do not describe these responsibilities of the former LSEL lab. Specifically, the standard operating procedures did not specify which conflicts or types of artifacts the former LSEL laboratory should work on or what priority should be given to analyzing artifacts from closed cases. GAO continues to believe that until the responsibilities of the different DPAA laboratories are clarified in written guidance with regard to which conflicts and types of artifacts the different laboratories are responsible for working on, along with priorities for working on closed cases, the potential for inefficient and ineffective interactions between the different laboratories may continue.

Action:

The Secretary of Defense should direct the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Policy) to revise Department of Defense (DOD) Directive 2310.07E and finalize and issue the new, related DOD instruction to supplement this directive. Clarification of roles and responsibilities should be made particularly with respect to the following four functions: equipment and artifact identification and analysis; research and analysis; investigations; and family outreach and external communications.

Progress:

As of August 2017, DOD had taken steps to revise and issue guidance to clarify roles and responsibilities with respect to the functions GAO identified in its July 2013 report. In January 2017, DOD issued DOD Directive 5110.10, Defense POW/MIA Accounting Agency (DPAA), which designates a single organization for matters relating to the system for accounting for missing persons. In April 2017, DOD issued Directive 2310.07, which supersedes DOD Directive 2310.07E and provides additional information about the responsibilities of some members of the accounting community. DPAA officials said that they are developing the DOD Instruction that will establish specific procedures, roles, and responsibilities for the program. However, they said that in the interim, DPAA has established terms of reference that define the specific roles and responsibilities for each directorate within DPAA. GAO’s review of the terms of reference shows that this document clearly defines the roles and responsibilities for research and analysis and for investigations in a manner that addresses the identified concerns.

With regard to equipment and artifact identification and analysis, the DPAA laboratories updated their standard operating procedures to specify the format and procedures for writing life science equipment material evidence reports, which addresses GAO’s concerns related to the length and utility of these reports prepared by one of the laboratories. In addition, a DPAA laboratory official told GAO that DPAA is rethinking how different laboratory functions should be performed and where those capabilities should reside, and that a decision about the future course of action would likely be made in fiscal year 2018.  Finally, the DPAA terms of reference also establish responsibilities for various outreach functions, such as family outreach and public outreach. In addition, the DPAA operational plan has a communications line of effort that includes several key initiatives intended to integrate and synchronize DPAA’s efforts. The operation plan calls for the development of a Strategic Communication Plan in fiscal years 2017-2018 that is to include a consistent approach to DPAA internal communications and plans to align messages to the public. By addressing this action, the community of organizations responsible for accounting for missing persons is better positioned to eliminate its areas of inefficient overlap and resolve disagreements among community members.

Action:

 The Secretary of Defense should finalize the community-wide plan to develop the increased capability and capacity required by statute, with the support and participation of all community members. The initiatives and resources of all members of the missing persons accounting community should be integrated within the community-wide plan.

Progress:

The Defense POW/MIA Accounting Agency (DPAA) developed several documents that combined meet the intent of GAO’s July 2013 recommendation. In October 2015, DPAA issued a "DPAA Strategic Initiatives and Approach" document, which DPAA officials said was an overarching vision document for the new DPAA organization. In 2016, DPAA issued its global campaign plan, which is a 5-year plan about how DPAA would conduct its operations. The global campaign plan is then further elaborated on by the DPAA 2-year operational plan for fiscal years 2017-2018. GAO’s review of the operational plan shows that it appears to reflect the initiatives and resources of all members of the accounting community.

DPAA officials said that the development of the operational plan included external coordination and communication with family groups, veterans groups, the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the military services, and cemeteries; all organizations involved in the past conflicts accounting mission were included in the development of the operational plans. The operation plan also discussed disinterments as part of the effort to increase capacity, while also recognizing the need to build capacity for more field operations. By addressing this action, the community of organizations responsible for accounting for missing persons is better positioned to integrate resource needs across the community to increase DOD's capability and capacity to account for missing persons.

Action:

The Secretary of Defense should examine options for reorganizing the accounting community, and as part of that examination, consider alternative organizational options that would help unify the community's fragmented organizational structure and provide a more centralized chain of command.

Progress:

The Department of Defense (DOD) has taken action to address GAO's July 2013 recommendation to examine options for reorganizing the accounting community. On August 26, 2013, the Deputy Secretary of Defense issued a memorandum to the Director of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation (CAPE) to lead a review of the accounting community that would include recommendations for alternative structures and processes to conduct the accounting mission effectively. On March 28, 2014, CAPE issued its final report on the review of the organizational structure of the personnel accounting community. The review included an assessment of the pros and cons of multiple organizational options. For example, CAPE examined the pros and cons of uniting the Defense Prisoners of War (POW)/Missing Personnel Office and Joint POW/Missing in Action Accounting Command into a single organization. As a result, the DOD study puts the department in a better position to decide which organizational option best unifies the accounting community to achieve its accounting goals.