United States Government Accountability Office

GAO Report to Congressional Committees

MILITARY 

PERSONNEL 

Progress Made in 

Implementing 

Recommendations to 

Reduce Domestic 

Violence, but Further 

Management Action 

Needed 

May 2006 

 

GAO-06-540 
What GAO Found

United States Government Accountability Office

Why GAO Did This Study

Highlights

Accountability Integrity Reliability

May 2006

MILITARY PERSONNEL

Progress Made in Implementing 

Recommendations to Reduce Domestic 

Violence, but Further Management Action 

Needed 

Highlights of GAO-06-540, a report to 

congressional committees 

Due to concerns about domestic

violence in the military and its 

adverse effect on mission 

readiness, Congress required the 

Department of Defense (DOD) to

establish a task force to assess the 

services’ response to domestic 

violence and recommend 

improvements. The task force 

issued three reports containing 194

recommendations. The Fiscal Year

2004 National Defense 

Authorization Act required GAO to

review DOD’s progress in 

implementing the 

recommendations. This report 

discusses (1) DOD’s ability to 

report on domestic violence 

incidents and disciplinary actions, 

(2) the resources DOD has 

provided to implement the 

recommendations, and (3) DOD’s 

specific actions to ensure victim 

confidentiality and the education of

commanding officers, senior 

enlisted personnel, and chaplains. 

GAO also examined whether DOD 

has established an oversight 

framework to monitor 

implementation. 

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that DOD take

actions to address domestic 

violence data deficiencies, provide 

adequate personnel and a strategy 

for communicating its policy 

changes, maintain chaplain training

data, and establish an oversight

framework. DOD agreed with the 

thrust of our recommendations, 

with the exception of one that dealt 

with policy that DOD stated 

involved privacy concerns.

DOD’s ability to report on domestic violence incidents and disciplinary 

actions taken by commanders is hampered because the systems that the 

department uses to collect domestic violence information do not contain 

complete data. DOD’s domestic violence database does not capture data 

from all law enforcement systems and, therefore, does not provide a 

complete accounting of reported incidents and actions taken by 

commanders. Notwithstanding the task force’s recommendation to report on

the number of domestic violence incidents, DOD and the services have not 

developed any plans to address the data limitations, which do not allow for 

visibility over domestic violence incidents. Without complete information on 

reported incidents of domestic violence and the steps taken by commanders 

to address these incidents, DOD will not know the size and nature of the 

problems or be able to assess the effectiveness of its actions. 

DOD has provided about $23 million to implement the recommendations and 

has made progress in this regard. Specifically, GAO identified 94 

recommendations of varying potential importance as completed, 60 as 

pending further action, and 40 in which no action had been taken because

DOD either disagreed with the recommendations or determined that they 

were not applicable to the department. Nonetheless, DOD faces challenges 

in completing the pending recommendations in a timely manner because of 

potential shortages of essential personnel in the office overseeing 

implementation. In addition, DOD’s method of communicating its policy 

changes resulting from the recommendations has not ensured consistent 

practices and widespread understanding of the policies among DOD and the

services. 

While DOD is taking steps toward ensuring confidentiality for victims and to 

train its personnel on domestic violence issues, additional efforts are 

needed. To ensure victim confidentiality, DOD issued a policy, effective 

April 22, 2006, allowing victims to report domestic violence to specified 

people without notifying command. In addition, DOD issued guidance 

requiring training and is providing several educational options. However,

data regarding which chaplains have completed training are not available 

because the department and the services do not track this training. 

Chaplains play a special role in assisting domestic violence victims and, 

without complete training data, DOD may be unable to determine if 

chaplains have been provided the needed resources to assist victims. 

DOD has not established an oversight framework to monitor compliance 

with and evaluate implementation of the task force recommendations. While 

the task force recommended and DOD’s draft domestic violence instruction 

requires monitoring and evaluation of domestic violence efforts, DOD has 

not established a process to do so. Without an overall management 

framework, DOD and Congress have limited visibility and oversight to 

evaluate DOD’s implementation efforts and make needed improvements. 

www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-06-540.

To view the full product, including the scope 

and methodology, click on the link above. 

For more information, contact Valerie C. 

Melvin at (202) 512-6304 or

melvinv@gao.gov. 
Contents 

Letter 1

Results in Brief 4

Background 8

DOD’s Ability to Report on Domestic Violence Incidents and 

Commander Actions Is Hampered by Incomplete Data 9

Resources Provided and Progress Made, but Challenges Exist to 

Implementing the Remaining Task Force Recommendations 12

Steps Taken to Ensure Confidentiality and Provide Domestic 

Violence Training, but Additional Efforts Needed 20

DOD Has Not Established an Oversight Framework to Monitor 

Compliance and Evaluate Implementation of Recommendations 25

Conclusions 26

Recommendations for Executive Action 27

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation 27

Appendix I Scope and Methodology 32 

Appendix II Resources Provided to Implement Task Force 

Recommendations 37 

Appendix III 194 Defense Task Force on Domestic Violence 

Recommendations 39 

Appendix IV DOD’s Directive-Type Memoranda and Policy

Implementing the Task Force Recommendations 54 

Appendix V Comments from the Department of Defense 56 

Appendix VI GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments 60 

Page i GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
Tables 

Table 1: Installations Visited During the Review 32

Table 2: Resources and Projects to Implement Task Force 

Recommendations 37

Table 3: Community Collaboration Recommendations 39

Table 4: Education and Training Recommendations 43

Table 5: Offender Accountability Recommendations 45

Table 6: Victim Safety Recommendations 47

Table 7: Other Recommendations 50

Table 8: DOD’s Memoranda Implementing Task Force 

Recommendations 54

Figure 

Figure 1: Defense Task Force on Domestic Violence 

Recommendations by Themes and Implementation Status 14

Abbreviations 

DOD Department of Defense 

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without further 

permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain copyrighted images or 

other material, permission from the copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to 

reproduce this material separately. 

Page ii GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
United States Government Accountability Office

Washington, DC 20548 

May 24, 2006

The Honorable John Warner 

Chairman 

The Honorable Carl Levin 

Ranking Minority Member 

Committee on Armed Services 

United States Senate 

The Honorable Duncan L. Hunter 

Chairman 

The Honorable Ike Skeleton 

Ranking Minority Member 

Committee on Armed Services 

House of Representatives 

Congress and the Department of Defense (DOD) have expressed concerns

about domestic violence in the military and its adverse effect on unit 

morale and mission readiness. DOD defines domestic violence as “[a]n 

offense under the United States Code, the Uniform Code of Military 

Justice, or State law that involves the use, attempted use, or threatened 

use of force or violence against a person of the opposite sex, or a violation 

of a lawful order issued for the protection of a person of the opposite sex, 

who is (a) a current or former spouse; (b) a person with whom the abuser 

shares a child in common; or (c) a current or former intimate partner with 

whom the abuser shares or has shared a common domicile.” Further, to 

separate criminal from noncriminal incidents, DOD’s definition of 

domestic abuse encompasses (1) domestic violence as defined above, or

(2) a pattern of behavior resulting in emotional/psychological abuse, 

economic control, and/or interference with personal liberty that is 

directed toward a person of the opposite sex who meets the same criteria 

as defined for domestic violence.1

 Serious adverse consequences for 

servicemembers who commit acts of domestic violence can range from 

nonjudicial punishments that could remove a servicemember from normal 

duties to criminal sanctions that could result in imprisonment. 

 1

DOD adopted the definitions for domestic violence and domestic abuse in 2004. 

Page 1 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
Following a number of reported high-profile domestic violence cases 

involving soldiers who killed their spouses, Congress required DOD to 

take several actions to address concerns about domestic violence in the 

military. Specifically, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 

Year 2000 required DOD to, among other things, (1) establish a central 

database of information on domestic violence incidents reported to a 

commander, military law enforcement, or officials responsible for clinical 

treatment or support services and the action(s) taken by the commanding 

officers when disciplinary measures were required, and to report this 

information to the administrator of the database annually; and (2) 

establish a Defense Task Force on Domestic Violence to assess the 

military’s response to domestic violence and make recommendations for 

improvement.2

 The task force issued three reports over the next 3 years, 

which collectively contained almost 200 recommendations. To highlight its

concerns, the task force stated in its first report that domestic violence is

an offense against the institutional values of the military services of the 

United States that degrades the overall readiness of our armed forces. 

The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 20043

 required us 

to review DOD’s progress in implementing the task force 

recommendations. In accordance with that act and agreements with your 

offices, this report discusses (1) DOD’s ability to report on domestic 

violence incidents in the military and disciplinary actions taken by 

commanders to address these incidents, (2) the extent to which DOD has 

provided resources to the office overseeing the implementation of the task

force’s recommendations and the extent to which the recommendations 

have been implemented, and (3) the specific actions that DOD has taken 

on recommendations to ensure the confidentiality for victims of domestic 

violence and the education of commanding officers, senior enlisted 

personnel, and chaplains. The report also discusses the extent to which 

DOD has established an oversight framework to guide and evaluate its 

implementation of the recommendations. 

To determine DOD’s ability to report on domestic violence incidents in the 

military and command disciplinary actions, we reviewed and analyzed 

information on and reports from DOD’s Defense Incident-Based Reporting

System, which contains data on criminal incidents of domestic violence, 

 2

 Pub. L. No. 106-65, at 591, 594 (1999). 

3

 Pub. L. No. 108 -136, at 575 (2003). 

Page 2 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
and the Family Advocacy Program Central Registry.4

 In addition, we 

reviewed DOD’s three reports to Congress on reported domestic violence 

incidents in the military, which were issued in November 2001 for fiscal 

year 2000 data, February 2003 for fiscal year 2001 data, and July 2004 for 

fiscal year 2002 data. To assess the reliability of the data in DOD’s systems, 

we (1) reviewed existing information about the data and the system that 

produced them and (2) interviewed agency officials knowledgeable about 

the data. We concluded that the data from the Defense Incident-Based 

Reporting System database were not reliable enough to enable DOD to 

accurately report on the number of domestic violence incidents in the 

military. 

To determine the extent to which DOD (1) provided resources to the office 

overseeing implementation, (2) implemented the task force 

recommendations, and (3) established an oversight framework, we 

interviewed knowledgeable DOD officials, including those in DOD’s 

Family Violence Policy Office and Family Advocacy Program Office, and 

analyzed relevant documents and data. These documents and data 

included budget information; DOD’s strategic plan for implementing the 

task force recommendations; DOD’s Reports on Implementation of 

Recommendations of the Defense Task Force on Domestic Violence 

submitted on August 8, 2005, and February 15, 2006; training materials for 

chaplains and commanding officers; and related metrics, applicable laws, 

regulations, policy memoranda, and other documents DOD and the 

services used to support implementation of the task force’s 

recommendations and evaluation of that implementation. 

Additionally, we visited at least 2 military installations for each service in 

the United States and 5 overseas, for a total of 15 installations. During 

these visits, we conducted nongeneralizable small group discussions with

and obtained supporting documentation from various installation officials,

including commanding officers, chaplains, victim advocates, family 

advocacy program managers, and staff judge advocates. We also 

conducted focus groups with military police and senior enlisted personnel 

at these installations. We performed our work in accordance with 

generally accepted government auditing standards from July 2005 through 

 4

 The Family Advocacy Central Registry collects clinical information about the initial 

allegation of domestic abuse, support and services provided to victims of such abuse, and

treatment, such as anger management classes, given to alleged abusers. 

Page 3 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
March 2006. More details on our scope and methodology are presented in 

appendix I. 

DOD’s ability to report on domestic violence incidents and disciplinary 

actions taken by commanders is hampered because the systems that the 

department uses to collect domestic violence information do not contain 

complete data. Specifically, in an effort to satisfy the requirement in the 

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000, DOD, in June 

2000, established the central domestic violence database in its Defense 

Incident-Based Reporting System (which contains criminal incidents). 

However, our analysis revealed that this database does not contain 

complete data that would enable DOD to accurately report on the number 

of domestic violence incidents in the military and the command 

disciplinary actions that were taken. DOD officials informed us that its 

domestic violence database of criminal incidents lacks complete data

because some of the services’ law enforcement systems that feed into it

are not yet operational. In addition, we determined that a number of 

installations were not reporting command disciplinary actions into the law 

enforcement data systems as required by DOD guidance. In its 2002 report 

to Congress on reported domestic violence incidents, DOD stated that of

the 2,173 Army and Air Force incidents for which sufficient evidence 

existed to take disciplinary action, 1,027, or 47 percent, had no actions 

identified. Notwithstanding the task force recommendation and the 

legislative requirement to report on the number of incidents, DOD has not 

developed plans to address the data limitations. Without complete data on 

reported incidents of domestic violence and the steps taken by 

commanding officers to address these incidents, Congress and DOD will 

lack the visibility and information needed to understand the magnitude of 

the domestic violence problem, identify domestic violence trends, and 

address emerging issues. To ensure that complete data exist and can be 

reported annually as required, we are recommending that DOD (1) develop

a comprehensive management plan to address deficiencies in the domestic 

violence data captured in its law enforcement systems, and (2) take 

appropriate steps to ensure that command actions related to domestic 

violence incidents are entered in the law enforcement systems as required. 

DOD generally concurred with these recommendations. 

Results in Brief 

DOD has provided funding that has been used to implement many of the 

task force’s recommendations, but personnel shortages and ineffective 

communication of related policies have hindered the department’s efforts. 

Since fiscal year 2003, DOD has provided the Family Violence Policy Office 

approximately $23 million to implement the task force’s 

Page 4 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
recommendations. Among its investments, DOD used the money to fund a 

contract to provide additional victim advocate and shelter services and 

training for various DOD professionals. This funding helped the 

department implement many of the task force recommendations during 

the past 3 years. Specifically, our analysis of the status of DOD’s actions to 

implement the task force’s recommendations showed that 94 had been 

completed, 60 had pending actions, and 40 had no actions planned because 

DOD either disagreed with the recommendations or determined they were

not applicable to the department. Despite the funding to date and reported 

progress, personnel shortages and ineffective communication of its 

policies could hinder DOD’s efforts to implement the pending task force 

recommendations and to improve its response to domestic violence.

Although retaining key personnel is a good internal control principle, as of 

March 2006, DOD had not fully staffed the office overseeing 

implementation of the task force recommendations. According to officials

in the Family Violence Policy Office, without adequate personnel, they will 

not be able to implement all of the pending recommendations in a timely 

manner. In addition, DOD’s method of communicating its new domestic 

violence guidance has produced inconsistent practices among DOD and 

the services. DOD issued 16 interim directive-type memoranda to 

implement changes in response to the task force recommendations. The 

department communicated these memoranda to the services via mail to 

the Service Secretaries offices and e-mail or Web pages. However, some 

installation officials stated that memoranda and guidance sent by e-mail 

and Web pages were not reaching their level in a timely manner and had 

ultimately resulted in them not knowing about and, thus, not consistently 

following current policies and guidance. For example, in response to a 

task force recommendation, DOD initially allowed distribution of military 

protective orders to law enforcement and family advocacy personnel, but 

reversed this policy due to privacy concerns. This policy change, however, 

was not effectively communicated, causing many inconsistent practices 

throughout the installations we visited. Without an overall communication 

strategy that promotes clear and consistent policy among DOD and the 

services, there may continue to be inconsistencies in knowledge on DOD’s 

domestic violence guidance. We are recommending that DOD (1) develop 

a plan to ensure adequate personnel are available to implement the 

remaining task force recommendations and (2) establish a strategy for 

communicating its policies, to include clearly articulating its policy 

regarding the distribution of military protective orders. In commenting on 

a draft of our report, DOD concurred with the first recommendation. 

However, due to privacy concerns, DOD partially nonconcurred with an 

earlier version of the second recommendation, which asked the 

department to reconsider the task force’s recommendation on providing 

Page 5 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
copies of the military protective orders to law enforcement and family 

advocacy officials. Since DOD stated that it has considered the issue of 

providing the protective orders and continues to believe there are privacy 

concerns, we modified our original recommendation to emphasize the 

department’s need to clearly communicate its policy regarding distribution 

of military protective orders. 

DOD is taking steps, such as issuing policy, to address the task force’s 

specific recommendations to ensure confidentiality for victims and to train 

its commanding officers, senior enlisted personnel, and chaplains; 

however, the department’s final policy on confidentiality did not take 

effect until April 2006, and additional efforts are needed to ensure that 

appropriate training is received. In its efforts to ensure confidentiality, 

DOD issued its Restricted Reporting Policy for Incidents of Domestic 

Abuse on January 22, 2006. This policy is to allow victims to report 

incidents of domestic abuse to health care providers, victim advocates, 

and other specified people so that victims can benefit from access to 

medical care or victim advocacy services and support without initiating 

the investigative process or notifying the victim’s or alleged offender’s 

commanding officer. The intent of the policy is to encourage victims to 

seek help that they might not otherwise receive because they feared for 

the family’s overall financial welfare and that the alleged offender’s 

military career might be jeopardized. However, the policy did not take 

effect until April 22, 2006. With respect to its training efforts, DOD has 

issued guidance requiring training for commanding officers, senior 

enlisted personnel, and chaplains. The military services are providing 

educational options for commanding officers and senior enlisted 

personnel such as Web-based training and training events held at the 

installations. In addition, chaplains, who have a special role in assisting 

domestic violence victims, are receiving training at their basic officer’s 

course, and periodically through continuing professional military 

education. However, complete data on which chaplains have received 

training are not available. Without complete data, DOD can not be assured 

of the extent to which these personnel have been trained and provided 

with resources that will assist them in effectively dealing with domestic 

violence issues. Some Army and Navy chaplains told us that they may 

notify command about domestic violence cases identified during a 

privileged communication. According to the Army regulation,

5

 however, 

 5

 Army Regulation 165-1, Religious Activities: Chaplain Activities in the United States

Army, Mar. 25, 2004. 

Page 6 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
such communications given to chaplains as a formal act of religion or as a 

matter of conscience are protected and are not to be disclosed without 

permission of the person making the communication. A breach of this 

confidence would be contrary to the Army regulation. Without additional

guidance and emphasis within chaplain training to clarify this issue, DOD 

will be unable to ensure that all chaplains are prepared to handle private 

information provided by victims or offenders, which could deter both 

victims and offenders from seeking assistance. Accordingly, we are 

recommending that DOD, in conjunction with the services, (1) develop 

procedures and metrics to ensure that accurate, consistent, and timely 

domestic violence training data are collected for chaplains; and 

(2) develop additional guidance and training materials for chaplains 

clarifying their privileged communication responsibilities. DOD did not 

concur with the first recommendation and partially nonconcurred with the 

second recommendation, both of which were originally directed to the 

Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness and family 

advocacy program officials. DOD commented that these two 

recommendations were more appropriately directed to the Military 

Departments. We agree. We have revised our report to direct the 

recommendations to the services. However, in our view, these

recommendations are also appropriately directed to the Under Secretary 

of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, who has oversight responsibility 

and stewardship for domestic violence issues. 

While some progress has been made in implementing the task force 

recommendations, DOD has not established an oversight framework to 

monitor compliance with the recommendations and evaluate its 

implementation efforts. DOD’s draft domestic violence instruction requires 

the Military Community and Family Policy office to monitor compliance 

with and periodically evaluate domestic violence efforts. However, the

draft instruction does not communicate how this should be done. 

Although DOD officials told us that the service headquarters monitor and 

evaluate the performance of the family advocacy program offices through 

their accreditation process, they acknowledged that the service 

accreditation reports are not sent to DOD and that the department has 

limited visibility into the services’ domestic violence efforts. Further, the 

Family Violence Policy Office has not established a formal process for 

monitoring and reporting progress of the overall implementation of the 

task force recommendations. Without an overall management framework 

and a process for monitoring and reporting on implementation of the 

recommendations, DOD and Congress have limited visibility and oversight

to evaluate implementation efforts and make needed improvements and 

thus, ensure the success of its efforts. We are recommending that DOD 

Page 7 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
develop and implement, in conjunction with the services, a DOD-wide 

oversight framework that includes a results-oriented evaluation plan for 

assessing the effectiveness of the implemented recommendations, and a 

process for monitoring and reporting on ongoing implementation efforts. 

DOD concurred with this recommendation. 

DOD’s comments and our evaluation of them are discussed in detail in a 

later section of this report. The full text of the department’s written 

comments is contained in appendix V. 

Following a number of high-profile domestic violence cases involving 

soldiers stationed at Fort Campbell, Kentucky, who killed their wives, 

Congress, in the National Defense Authorization Act of 2000, required the 

Secretary of Defense to establish the Defense Task Force on Domestic 

Violence. The task force was chartered as a 3-year effort to assist the 

Secretary of Defense in identifying ways to prevent domestic violence in 

the military, when possible, and in responding more effectively when 

domestic violence occurs. In March 2000, 24 members were appointed to

the task force. These members included 12 senior officials from the four 

services and 12 senior officials from the civilian sector who were experts 

in the area of domestic violence. 

Background 

The act also required the task force to develop a strategic plan for DOD 

that included recommendations for improving DOD’s domestic violence 

efforts in areas such as victim safety programs, domestic violence training

for military commanders, and domestic violence responses at overseas 

military installations. The task force also assessed and made 

recommendations regarding the roles and responsibilities that command, 

chaplain, law enforcement, legal, and medical personnel have with regard 

to addressing domestic violence incidents. From February 2001 through 

February 2003, the task force issued three reports containing 194 

recommendations for improving DOD’s response to domestic violence. 

The task force identified four primary themes with regard to the 

recommendations made in the three reports: 

• Community collaboration—addresses coordination and collaboration 

issues among all military organizations, such as family advocacy and legal 

offices, in relation to domestic violence, as well as coordination between

military and civilian communities. 

Page 8 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
• Education and training—addresses training issues for commanding 

officers, senior enlisted personnel, Family Advocacy Program staff, and 

first responders, such as military police. 

• Offender accountability—identifies measures to improve individual 

offender accountability and program accountability, as well as improve 

dispositions and case management. 

• Victim safety—addresses issues related to victim safety programs, 

confidentiality for victims, and other policies to enhance victim safety. 

In January 2003, within the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for 

Personnel and Readiness, the Military Community and Family Policy 

Office established the Family Violence Policy Office to coordinate 

implementation of the task force’s recommendations, many of which were 

aimed at improving DOD’s Family Advocacy Program. The Family 

Advocacy Program, also under the Military Community and Family Policy 

Office, provides services that contribute to the health of military families, 

treats victims of domestic violence, and offers rehabilitation and treatment 

for abusers. The Family Advocacy Program Director works in conjunction

with service headquarters managers to oversee the execution of the 

program within each service. 

DOD’s ability to report domestic violence incidents involving 

servicemembers and the disciplinary actions taken by commanders is 

hampered because the data systems that the department uses to collect 

domestic violence information contain incomplete data. The National 

Defense Authorization Act of 20006

 required DOD to develop a centralized 

domestic violence database of information on incidents of domestic 

violence involving members of the Armed Forces. This includes domestic 

violence incidents reported to a commander, a law enforcement authority 

of the Armed Forces, or a family advocacy program official. Under the act, 

the Secretaries of the military departments are required to report this 

information annually to the administrator of the database. DOD is also 

required, under Section 591, to report information from the database, 

along with its responses to each of the three task force reports.7

 In an 

effort to satisfy the legislation, DOD established the central domestic 

DOD’s Ability to 

Report on Domestic 

Violence Incidents 

and Commander 

Actions Is Hampered 

by Incomplete Data 

 6

 Pub. L. No. 106-65, at 594 (1999). 

7

 Pub. L. No. 106-65, at 591 (1999). 

Page 9 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
violence database within its Defense Incident-Based Reporting System.8

This database contains domestic violence incidents that are criminal in 

nature including: infractions of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, state 

law, or violation of a protection order. 

Although DOD established the central domestic violence database in June 

2000,

9

 it is not yet fully operational and it does not contain complete 

information about reported incidents of domestic violence. DOD officials 

stated that the information contained in the database on the number of 

incidents is not complete because some of the law enforcement systems 

used by the services that feed into the central database are not yet 

operational. These are the Air Force’s Office of Special Investigation 

system, which is expected to be operational by August 2006; the Army’s 

Judge Advocate General Office system, which is still in development; and

the Air Force’s Judge Advocate General Office system, which is expected 

to be operational by June 2006. As a result, the central domestic violence 

database does not contain any information about domestic violence 

incidents that would be captured in these systems. 

The central domestic violence database captures incidents of a criminal

nature that were responded to by military law enforcement personnel; but 

it does not contain information on incidents reported to Family Advocacy 

personnel such as emotional abuse or domestic violence incidents that 

occur off the installation. To obtain this information, as required in the 

act,10 DOD must supplement data from the Defense Incident-Based 

Reporting System with data from the Family Advocacy Program Central 

Registry, which contains clinical data on domestic violence incidents. 

However, the Central Registry data system previously provided incomplete 

domestic violence data because until January 2006, the Central Registry 

only contained reported incidents of abuse involving current spouses. It 

did not contain domestic violence data as defined by DOD’s 2004 

 8

 An official in DOD’s Law Enforcement Policy and Support Office told us that the Defense 

Incident-Based Reporting System was designed and constructed to collect and report crime 

data under a number of statutes, including the Victims Rights and Restitution Act of 1990 

and the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1994. We were told, however, that

because the services are not reporting information needed to make up the total input to the 

law enforcement database, collection and/or reporting for this are done manually “offline”

instead of through the Defense Incident-Based Reporting System. 

9 DOD’s Manual for Defense Incident-Based Reporting System, 7730.47M, dated July 25, 

2003, discusses requirements for the centralized database on domestic violence. 

10 Pub. L. No. 106-65, at 594 (1999). 

Page 10 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
definition that involved former spouses and intimate partners with whom

the alleged offender shared a child or a common domicile. Therefore, prior 

to 2006, DOD did not provide complete information on all reported 

instances of domestic violence. 

DOD used information from the two systems in preparing its reports to 

Congress on the number of incidents of domestic violence in the military 

and commanders’ actions taken in responding to them during fiscal years 

2000 through 2002. However, DOD officials who have responsibility for 

gathering these data acknowledged that the statistics contained in these 

reports were questionable. Moreover, they informed us that since the last

report to Congress on fiscal year 2002 incidents, no attempts had been

made to match up the information from the two systems, despite a June 8, 

2000, memorandum from the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for 

Personnel and Readiness that directed them to do so. Our analysis 

confirmed that neither system had complete data to enable DOD to 

accurately determine the extent of reported domestic violence incidents in

the military. 

Beyond these concerns, our review of information in the Defense IncidentBased Reporting System and supporting service law enforcement systems 

revealed that a number of installations were not reporting disciplinary 

actions taken by the commanders as required.11 For example, in the fiscal 

year 2002 report that DOD released to Congress, DOD reported that of the 

2,173 Army and Air Force incidents for which sufficient evidence existed 

to take disciplinary action, 1,027, or 47 percent had no actions listed. DOD 

and service instructions require that command disciplinary actions be 

entered into the law enforcement systems. Moreover, these systems 

contain a data field to record commanders’ actions in responding to 

domestic violence incidents. However, during our site visits, we found that 

some commander disciplinary actions were not being entered into the data

field and some of the law enforcement officials we interviewed stated that 

they were unaware that they were required to do so. These officials 

acknowledged the importance of including this information to provide 

visibility over what disciplinary actions had been taken and that there was 

a field available in the system for them to do so. At one installation, we 

found that hard copies of the commander disciplinary actions were 

 11 Department of Defense Directive-Type Memorandum, Establishment of DOD Database 

on Domestic Violence and Procedures for Submitting Domestic Violence Data, June 8,

2000. 

Page 11 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
maintained in a file in the Provost Marshall’s office, but this information 

had not been entered into the law enforcement database. 

Officials who oversee the DOD central domestic violence database and the 

Central Registry data system, as well as Family Violence Policy Office 

personnel, are aware of the problems with obtaining complete information 

about domestic violence incidents and commander disciplinary actions. 

However, officials in the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for 

Personnel and Readiness have not developed a plan for correcting the 

deficiencies and ensuring that (1) the central database on domestic 

violence in the Defense Incident-Based Reporting System and service law 

enforcement systems have complete and accurate data and (2) all 

commander disciplinary actions related to domestic violence incidents are

reported into these systems. Without complete data on reported incidents 

of domestic violence and the steps taken by commanding officers to 

address these incidents, Congress and DOD will lack the visibility and 

information needed to understand the magnitude of the domestic violence

problem, identify domestic violence trends, and proactively address these 

issues as they emerge. 

Over the past 3 years, DOD provided the Family Violence Policy Office 

about $23 million, which it has used to make progress toward 

implementing many of the task force’s recommendations. Nonetheless, 

two challenges—shortages in critical staff and ineffective strategies for 

communicating new domestic violence policies— threaten progress and 

limit assurance of consistent application of its new policies. 

From fiscal year 2003 through fiscal year 2005, the Military Community 

and Family Policy Office provided the Family Violence Policy Office with 

approximately $23 million to implement the task force’s 

recommendations. The largest portion, about $17 million, was for funding 

a contract to provide victim advocate services and shelter services to 

victims of domestic violence. Program analysts from the Military 

Community and Family Policy Office told us that this contract provides 

on-call services from within the local community, supporting 

approximately 45 full-time and 40 part-time on-call advocates each month.

The Family Violence Policy Office was also provided approximately $3 

million to train various DOD professionals in 2005. The cost of this training 

included funds for a contractor to perform conference planning, 

Resources Provided 

and Progress Made, 

but Challenges Exist 

to Implementing the 

Remaining Task Force 

Recommendations 

Resources Provided for 

Office Overseeing 

Implementation of 

Recommendations

Page 12 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
facilitation, and administrative management support services for these 

events . Additionally, the Family Violence Policy Office was provided 

$400,000 to develop a DOD-wide domestic violence public awareness 

campaign. Appendix II provides a detailed breakdown of the expenditures 

of the Family Violence Policy Office in implementing the task force 

recommendations. 

Our analysis of DOD’s actions in implementing the task force 

recommendations shows that DOD, as of March 2006, had implemented 

almost two-thirds of the recommendations they planned to carry out. 

While this shows progress, the recommendations vary in their relative 

importance to improving DOD’s efforts to address domestic violence; and 

thus, the implementation of some recommendations may not have as 

significant an impact on DOD’s efforts as will the implementation of 

others. Notwithstanding this point, of the 194 recommendations made by 

the task force, we found DOD had completed actions on 94 

recommendations, had actions pending on 60 recommendations, and had 

not taken actions on 40 recommendations because the department either 

disagreed with the recommendations, the recommendation was not 

applicable to the department, or DOD felt that the recommended action

was already undertaken. We counted recommendations as completed if 

we found evidence of action taken on the recommendation by DOD. 

Actions taken included guidance, policy memoranda, training materials, or 

other supporting documentation DOD issued to implement the task force 

recommendation. Additionally, we found, for the most part, 

documentation, focus group discussions, or interviews that showed the 

service and installation levels were implementing or had efforts to begin 

implementing DOD’s guidance on the completed actions. 

Figure 1 shows our analysis of DOD’s implementation status of the 194 

recommendations. The recommendations are grouped by the four primary

task force themes previously discussed in this report; recommendations 

that did not fit directly into one of these themes were classified as “other.” 

The “other” category contains items such as issues related to overseas 

installations and program management.12

Progress Made in 

Implementing Domestic 

Violence 

Recommendations

 12 This category also included special interest items such as the domestic violence 

definition, prevention of domestic violence, severity of abuse, recommended research, and

process model.

Page 13 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
Figure 1: Defense Task Force on Domestic Violence Recommendations by Themes 

and Implementation Status

As figure I shows, DOD has made the most progress in implementing 

recommendations pertaining to community collaboration and victim 

safety. DOD officials stated that their original focus was placed on 

addressing victim safety issues, in particular, because it was critical to 

ensure victims are protected from further abuse. A listing of all 194 

recommendations and our analysis of DOD’s status in completing them are 

included in appendix III. 

The Family Violence Policy Office believed that they had completed more 

recommendations than we identified in our analysis. Specifically, DOD 

officials provided a department-level status matrix that indicated that they

had completed 121 of the 194 task force recommendations. Our numbers 

differ because DOD identified 27 of the recommendations as complete 

when we found DOD actually had stated that it did not agree with 26 of the 

recommendations or took no action because the recommendation was 

Page 14 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
already being done or did not apply to them, and one recommendation was 

still pending. For example, the task force recommended that DOD 

centrally track military protective orders. DOD essentially disagreed with 

the recommendation, stating that it had determined that it would not be 

feasible to centrally record and track military protective orders because 

there were too few such orders to justify creating another database. 

Nevertheless, DOD categorized this recommendation as complete, while 

we categorized this recommendation as one with which they disagreed. 

We have grouped the 26 recommendations and the one pending action

with those that were identified as requiring no action and pending, 

respectively in appendix III, which shows our analysis of DOD’s status for 

the recommendations. 

Despite its investment to date and reported progress, potential personnel 

shortages in the DOD office implementing the recommendations could 

hinder the department’s timely implementation of the remaining 

recommendations. The personnel in this office have an essential role in 

implementing the domestic violence recommendations, with responsibility 

for, among other things, (1) drafting, revising, and coordinating DOD 

policy in response to domestic violence recommendations; (2) drafting 

training curricula and monitoring implementation of those curricula for 

family advocacy program staff, health care officials, and law enforcement, 

among others; and (3) drafting and coordinating public affairs strategies to 

inform the military community about the revised DOD response to 

domestic violence in the military. 

Officials in the Military Community and Family Policy Office and those in

the Family Violence Policy Office told us that, originally in 2003, five

positions had been provided for the team implementing the task force 

recommendations. This included one permanent position for the office 

supervisor; one term position for a program analyst; and three positions 

for senior-level officers on detail assignments from the services—one each 

from the Army, Navy, and Air Force. Position descriptions for military 

personnel stress that these individuals were to serve as military experts in 

implementing domestic violence programs. However, officials in the 

Family Violence Policy Office told us the Navy officer retired in 2004, and

the Air Force officer was detailed to another OSD position in 2005. The 

Navy did not “backfill” or replace its position, stating that the position was 

needed within their service, and officials in the Family Violence Policy 

Office stated that OSD had placed the Air Force position within another 

area of DOD because OSD had a greater need for that position there. Thus,

Limited Personnel in

Office Overseeing 

Implementation 

Page 15 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
since 2005, the Family Violence Policy Office has been reduced to three 

positions. 

During our review, officials in the Family Violence Policy Office stated that

the officer detailed from the Army is expected to retire in May 2006 and 

the term position is expected to expire in July 2006. The office had 

requested and obtained approval from the OSD Military Community and 

Family Policy Office to fill the Army position and renew the term position,

stating that these positions were needed to complete implementation of 

the remaining recommendations in a timely manner. The officials further 

noted that the remaining recommendations they will be implementing are 

more challenging than those already implemented and will require 

personnel experienced in domestic violence issues. For example, they 

explained that implementation of the recommendations aimed at 

revamping the Case Review Committee and the Offender Intervention 

require more research and analysis with experts within and outside of 

DOD. Without adequate personnel, the officials estimate that it may take 

more than 3 years to implement the remaining 60 task force 

recommendations. However, as of March 2006, officials in the Family 

Violence Policy Office told us that approval to fill the soon-to-be-vacant 

positions had not been obtained from the final approval authority at 

Washington Headquarters Services. Retaining key personnel who can 

affect the ability of a program to function effectively is a good internal 

control principle.13

DOD also faces a challenge in effectively communicating the policies that 

it has developed in response to the task force’s recommendations. DOD’s 

method of communicating its policy changes has not been effective in 

ensuring consistent practices or promoting widespread understanding of 

the new policies among DOD and the services. 

As of March 2006, DOD had issued 16 directive-type memoranda as interim 

guidance to quickly communicate information about changes resulting 

from implementation of the task force recommendations. (See app. IV for 

a list of these memoranda). Almost all of the directive-type memoranda set 

target dates for DOD to issue later guidance implementing the interim 

policies. In most cases, final guidance such as a directive was expected to

Implementation Policies 

Not Effectively 

Communicated 

 13 See GAO, Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government, GAO/AIMD-00-

21.3.1 (Washington, D.C.: November 1999). 

Page 16 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
be issued within 180 days after each memorandum was signed; however, 

as of March 2006, the final guidance had not been issued and most of the 

interim guidance is now more than 2 years old. Since the memoranda are 

interim guidance, they have been communicated to the services and 

throughout DOD through mail to the Service Secretaries and informally via 

e-mails and special Web pages14 rather than being formally posted on the 

official DOD directives Web site.15 Under internal control guidance, 

organizations should consistently apply policies, and sound management 

practices of leading organizations offer federal agencies a methodology for 

establishing effective communications to promote consistency.16 However, 

some DOD and service officials we met with stated that existing DOD 

guidance was not always consistent with the directive-type memoranda 

implementing the task force recommendations and that this inconsistency 

has sometimes caused confusion at the installation level. In addition, we 

found that information in the directive-type memoranda was not always 

communicated to the installations in a timely manner and had resulted in

some of the officials not knowing about and, thus not following current 

policies consistently. 

We identified several inconsistencies in implementing the 

recommendations as a result of DOD’s policy changes not being 

communicated effectively, including the following: 

• DOD’s Family Advocacy Program Directive 6400.1 has not been updated to

reflect DOD’s interim guidance that implements the task force 

recommendations, even though a number of the task force 

recommendations had called for these changes to be made in this 

directive. Family Advocacy officials told us they will not update their 

directive until the Family Violence Policy Office issues a new instruction, 

incorporating all of the interim guidance issued in the directive-type

memoranda. As a result, some DOD and service officials stated that 

inconsistent guidance from these two offices has been a source of 

 14 The special Web pages provide news and information for flag and general officers—i.e., 

http://www.commanderspage.com; while, another—i.e.,

http://www.militaryhomefront.dod.mil—provides servicemembers and their families with 

information on all quality-of-life issues, including domestic violence. 

15 As of March 30, 2006, DOD had posted Directive Type Memoranda on its official 

Directives Web site; however, this link only had 3 of the 16 domestic violence directive-type 

memoranda. 

16 See GAO, Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government, GAO/AIMD-00-

21.3.1 (Washington, D.C.: November 1999). 

Page 17 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
confusion. A prime example is that while DOD’s new definition of 

domestic violence was issued in 2004, staff at some of the installations we 

visited said that they did not become aware of the definition until late 2005

or January 2006. Consequently, some victims of domestic violence who 

were covered under the new definition, since 2004, may not have been 

considered for services. 

• The task force also recommended that DOD establish a policy that written 

copies of military protective orders be forwarded immediately to both law 

enforcement and family advocacy officials. While DOD initially issued a 

policy in March 2004 allowing distribution to law enforcement, it reversed 

this policy in July 2004 due to concerns with the military protective order’s 

use and dissemination. DOD’s August 8, 2005, status report on 

recommendations further stated that the Privacy Act17 does not allow 

distribution of the military protective orders to family advocacy and law 

enforcement. This policy change, however, was not effectively 

communicated, causing many inconsistent practices throughout the 

installations we visited. For example, contrary to the July 2004 guidance, 

DOD’s September 2005 domestic violence training materials provided to 

commanders, judge advocates, and law enforcement personnel contained 

information on leadership responsibilities, which stated that a copy of 

each order is to be forwarded to law enforcement and family advocacy.

Further, policy information on DOD’s Web sites that allowed the orders to 

be distributed to law enforcement was not changed until we notified DOD 

officials of the inconsistency. Additionally, we found inconsistent 

practices between the services. For example, the Army’s regulations18

allowed distribution of the protective orders to family advocacy and law 

enforcement officials. On the other hand, the Navy did not provide copies 

to family advocacy. However, a Navy instruction,19 which predated the 

DOD July 2004 guidance, allowed distribution to law enforcement. Navy 

officials stated that their guidance will be revised to reflect DOD 

requirements not to provide copies to law enforcement, upon release of 

DOD’s Domestic Violence instruction. Finally, our discussions with OSD

and service lawyers revealed that they believe providing copies of 

protective orders to family advocacy and law enforcement officials would 

not be a violation of the Privacy Act.

 17 The Privacy Act of 1974, Pub. L. No. 93-579 (1974) is the primary act that regulates the 

federal government’s use of personal information. It places limitations on agencies’ 

collection, disclosure, and use of personal information in systems of records. 

18 Army Regulation 608-18 (Sept. 27, 2004). 

19 OPNAVINST 1752.2A (Jul. 17, 1996). 

Page 18 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
• The task force recommended that “DOD mandate the military services to 

provide awareness education to military spouses regarding the transitional 

compensation program.”20 DOD said that no action was required on this 

recommendation “[s]ince Congress established the transitional 

compensation program; the services have routinely educated dependent 

family members about it.” However, during our installation visits we found 

inconsistent communication of this information. Discussion groups with 

victim advocates and interviews with family advocacy officials revealed 

that a few installations elected not to inform military members or spouses 

about transitional compensation until a specific victim had a documented, 

validated domestic violence case in which they would be eligible to 

receive benefits. The victim advocates stated that this was done to prevent 

potential abuse of the program. Some of the other installations were quite 

liberal about providing information on the program. They said they felt 

providing the information may encourage more people to come forward if 

they knew help was available. 

• The task force also recommended that DOD develop guidance for 

commanding officers on how to properly document domestic violence 

issues in separation papers to help facilitate transitional compensation. 

The directive-type memorandum issued by DOD to implement this 

recommendation states that commanding officers should be trained on 

transitional compensation, but it does not specifically require training 

them on how to “properly document separation papers.” Some victim 

advocates at installations we visited said that commanding officers do not 

always use proper documentation to ensure that victims will receive

transitional compensation and that some victims have been denied these

funds because of lack of documentation. DOD officials in the Family 

Violence Policy Office told us that guidance on waiver requirements, as 

recommended by the task force, is included in a draft instruction from the 

Military Personnel Policy Directorate on transitional compensation. We 

found inconsistencies in victim advocates’ knowledge of the waiver 

associated with transitional compensation requirements because this 

information had not been effectively communicated to the advocates. 

DOD officials in the Family Violence Policy Office, Family Advocacy 

Program Office, as well as officials in the four services acknowledged that 

communication could be a problem and may result in inconsistencies. 

 20 Congress established the transitional compensation program for abused spouses/family 

members of military personnel as part of the National Defense Authorization Act of Fiscal 

Year 1994, Pub. L. No. 103-160, at 554 (1993). The law authorizes temporary payments for

families in which the servicemember has been discharged administratively or by courtmartial for dependent-related abuse. 

Page 19 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
They also noted that formal instructions take years to draft and coordinate 

and that mailing the interim guidance to service secretaries, e-mailing it to 

key points of contacts, and placing the guidance on the Web pages were 

the best avenues to follow. However, in our view, without an overall 

communication strategy that provides a clear and consistent 

understanding of policy among DOD and the services, there may continue

to be confusion and inconsistencies among DOD and the services on 

implementing the task force’s recommendations. 

DOD is taking steps to address specific task force recommendations to 

ensure confidentiality for victims of domestic violence and to train 

commanding officers, senior enlisted personnel, and chaplains on how to 

respond to such incidents. In its efforts to ensure confidentiality, DOD has 

developed a restricted reporting policy that allows victims to report 

incidents of domestic abuse, which includes domestic violence, to health

care and victim advocacy specialists without mandatory disclosure to 

command or law enforcement officials. However, the policy was not 

implemented until April 2006. Further, in its efforts to provide additional 

domestic violence training, DOD issued guidance requiring training for 

commanding officers, senior enlisted personnel, and chaplains, but 

tracking and documenting these training efforts have not always occurred.

The task force had a number of recommendations asking DOD to explore 

options for creating a system of confidential services, privileged 

communications, and exemptions to mandatory reporting. The goal of 

these recommendations was to provide victims of domestic violence with

access to a credible avenue for receiving support, information, options, 

and resources to address the violence in their lives. In response to the task 

force’s recommendations, on January 22, 2006, DOD issued its Restricted 

Reporting Policy for Incidents of Domestic Abuse to ensure that domestic 

violence victims are protected, treated with dignity and respect, and 

provided with support, advocacy, and care. 

Under the new policy, victims can choose either unrestricted reporting or 

restricted reporting. Unrestricted reporting uses current reporting 

channels—e.g., chain of command, Family Advocacy Program, or law 

enforcement—and is for victims of domestic abuse who want to pursue an 

official investigation of an incident. Restricted reporting allows adult 

victims of domestic abuse to disclose the abuse to health care providers, 

victim advocates, or supervisors of victim advocates, and receive medical

treatment and victim advocacy services without notifying the alleged

Steps Taken to Ensure 

Confidentiality and 

Provide Domestic 

Violence Training, but 

Additional Efforts 

Needed 

New Restricted Reporting 

Policy Not Yet in Force 

Page 20 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
offender’s commanding officer or law enforcement. The new policy allows 

victims to receive relevant information, medical attention, and support 

while having additional time to make a more informed decision about 

reporting the incident. The task force found that victims were often 

reluctant to seek services because they had fears about the potential 

adverse impact the reported incident may have on the servicemember’s 

career and the family’s financial well-being, as well as concerns about 

their personal safety. 

However, the restricted reporting policy did not take effect until April 22,

2006, in order for the services to have time to develop consistent policies

and an implementation strategy. Consequently, at the time of our review, it 

was too soon to assess what effects this policy will have on reported cases 

of domestic violence. The new policy, nonetheless, was a topic of great

concern during our discussions at the 15 installations included in our 

study. Installation commanders, commanding officers, legal officers, 

provost marshals or heads of security forces, chaplains, family advocacy 

program managers, victim advocates, and health care providers all shared 

their views about the advantages and disadvantages of the restricted 

reporting policy. Their views varied considerably and ranged from 

unequivocal support for the policy, to uncertainty because of licensing and

ethical concerns, to outright objection. 

Those who expressed support for the policy said they did so because they 

felt the policy promoted victim confidentiality, safety, and support. Some 

unit commanders, for example, stated that the policy would allow the 

victims to receive medical care and time to decide if they wanted to press 

charges. In addition, chaplains at some installations voiced approval for 

the policy because it opened another avenue for victims to receive

assistance without getting others involved. 

Conversely, officials who objected to the restricted reporting policy said

they did so because they believed the policy would not encourage victims 

to “officially” report the incident, and thus would send the wrong message 

to aggressors, as well as diminish the commanding officers’ ability to hold

offenders accountable. Specifically, legal officers serving as prosecutors 

and commanding officers at several installations told us that they objected 

to the policy because, while permitting victims to receive some types of 

assistance was positive, it allowed aggressors to remain free from 

disciplinary actions and to be able to continue the pattern of domestic 

violence. The legal officers also expressed concern about the evidence 

that would not be captured at the crime scene when domestic violence 

occurs because the incident was not reported immediately. 

Page 21 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
One area of concern raised during our installation visits dealt with specific 

licensing issues and ethical dilemmas. For example, health care providers 

expressed concerns that the new restricted reporting policy may conflict

with state licensing requirements mandating them to report incidents of 

domestic violence to civilian authorities. They also expressed reservations 

about the policy in cases where they had to provide medical aid to a 

severely injured individual who appeared to be untruthful about the 

source of the injury. While this policy is similar to DOD’s Sexual Assault 

Prevention and Response Program policy, many officials in our discussion 

groups said that similar reporting may not be appropriate. According to 

these individuals, the perpetrator of sexual assault does not usually reside 

with the victim; therefore unreported incidents are less likely to place a 

victim in a situation for further abuse, unlike domestic violence where a 

victim would return home to the alleged abuser. Some of the health care 

providers expressed concerns that they might be placed in a position in 

which they had to send a battered victim back into a dangerous situation. 

During the time of our installation visits—i.e., from October 2005 through

February 2006—the restricted reporting policy was issued and addresses 

some of the concerns and issues from our discussion groups. For example, 

the policy states that confidentiality will be suspended for specific 

reasons, such as to prevent or lessen a serious and imminent threat to the 

health or safety of the victim or another person or when required by state 

statute. While some of the issues are addressed in the policy, the level of 

support this policy will provide victims of domestic violence, the potential

impact restricted reporting will have on law enforcement investigations, as 

well as the impact the policy will have on a commander’s ability to hold 

perpetrators accountable, will be determined during implementation. 

Beyond confidentiality, the task force made over 10 recommendations that 

focused on training for commanding officers, senior enlisted personnel, 

and chaplains to respond to domestic violence issues. To respond to the 

task force recommendations to train commanding officers and senior 

enlisted personnel, DOD issued guidance directing the services to require 

these officials to receive such training. Specifically, the Office of the Under

Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness issued a directive-type

memorandum titled “Domestic Abuse Response and Intervention 

Training for Commanding Officers and Senior Enlisted Personnel” in 

February 2004. This memorandum required training on specified topics, 

such as dynamics of domestic violence, common misconceptions of victim

safety, and responses to alleged domestic abuse. The military services are 

addressing this requirement by providing several educational options, 

Additional Efforts Are 

Needed to Ensure Training 

Is Received 

Page 22 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
including Web-based training, training at the professional military 

education schools, and training at installations led by instructors. 

In addressing the task force recommendation to train chaplains, the Office 

of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness issued a 

directive-type memorandum titled “Domestic Abuse Training for 

Chaplains” on January 29, 2004, which required training for chaplains on 

specified topics. One of the primary topics that chaplains received training

on was privileged communication,21 because of the special role chaplains 

play in providing assistance to victims of domestic violence. Chaplains we 

spoke with said they received this training at their basic officer’s course, 

periodically through continuing professional military education, and at

installations. 

While training on domestic violence issues is being provided to

commanding officers, senior enlisted personnel, and chaplains, DOD does 

not have complete data on which chaplains have received training because 

the Military Community and Family Policy Office did not require tracking 

or documenting training provided to chaplains. Although internal control 

guidance states that management should document and track agency

initiatives to ascertain if they are achieved and provide follow-up actions, 

the Family Violence Policy Office and Family Advocacy Office did not 

develop training metrics. Without accurate training data and 

documentation, DOD lacks visibility over whether chaplains have been 

adequately trained and are being provided with resources that will assist 

them in handling domestic violence issues. 

Furthermore, during our discussion groups with chaplains, which included 

a mix of experienced and junior officers, we found that some chaplains did 

not fully understand their responsibilities concerning privileged 

communication. For example, the Army regulation states that such 

privileged communication is not to be disclosed to third persons other 

than those to whom disclosure furthers the purpose of the 

communication, or to those reasonably necessary for the transmission of 

the communication. The regulation also states that the chaplain and 

chaplain assistant will not divulge privileged communication without the 

written consent of the person(s) authorized to claim the privilege. Some 

 21 A communication to a chaplain given as a formal act of religion or as a matter of

conscience that is made in confidence and not intended to be disclosed to others is a 

privileged communication. 

Page 23 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
Army and Navy chaplains we interviewed stated that they may notify the

chain of command about a privileged communication. For example, one 

chaplain mentioned that there was no Army requirement that chaplains 

report information discussed during a privileged communication and 

others stated that the current Army regulation for chaplains speaks to this. 

The chaplain further stated that some Army chaplains had decided for 

themselves what they would and would not report and would explain this

to people that they counseled. A Navy chaplain also stated that under 

certain conditions he would notify the commanding officer if an individual 

admitted being involved in domestic violence, even if the person made the

statement as a matter of religious conscience. Other chaplains in our 

discussion groups told us that a breach of privileged communication could 

ruin the reputation of chaplains and lead to no one seeking their help. 

The task force, in its 2002 report, also had similar findings and 

recommended that DOD issue guidance clarifying clergy confidentiality. 

An official at the Chaplain Board told us that, since it takes so long to 

issue DOD-wide guidance, DOD is not likely to issue additional guidance 

addressing confidentiality and privileged communication because the 

services have issued guidance, which is consistent with the Military Rules 

of Evidence.

22 However, when we discussed privileged communication 

with chaplains, many referred to service guidance, as well as the Military 

Rules of Evidence; but some were unclear as to what their responsibilities 

were. Additional guidance and emphasis during chaplain training could 

facilitate a consistent understanding by chaplains of their responsibilities 

regarding confidentiality. Without taking action, DOD may be unable to 

ensure that all chaplains are prepared to handle private information 

provided by victims or offenders, which could deter both from seeking 

assistance. 

 22 The Military Rule of Evidence 503, Communications to Clergy, states that a person has a 

privilege to refuse to disclose in legal proceedings and to prevent another from disclosing a 

confidential communication to a clergy or to a clergyman’s assistant if such a 

communication is made either as a formal act of religion or as a matter of conscience. 

Page 24 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
DOD has not established an oversight framework to monitor compliance 

with and evaluate implementation of the task force recommendations on 

domestic violence. The task force’s initial 2001 report recommended that

DOD strategically use regional oversight and monitoring visits at both the 

DOD and service levels to improve the department’s oversight of its efforts 

to address domestic violence. DOD’s draft domestic abuse instruction 

requires the Military Community and Family Policy Office of the Under 

Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness to monitor compliance 

with the instruction and periodically evaluate domestic violence efforts. 

The draft instruction, however, does not communicate how this should be 

done and the Military Community and Family Policy Office has not 

established a formal process for doing this. 

Officials in the Family Violence Policy Office stated that action on the task

force recommendation for oversight is pending and told us they were 

exploring options for addressing it, such as having the DOD Inspector 

General perform reviews every 2 or 3 years. These officials and those from 

the Family Advocacy Program told us that the services’ headquarters 

monitor and evaluate their own installation family advocacy program 

offices through their accreditation processes.23 However, they

acknowledged that the service accreditation reports are not sent to DOD 

and that the department has limited visibility into service domestic 

violence efforts. The Military Community and Family Policy Office is 

considering asking officials from the Family Advocacy Program Office and 

the Family Violence Policy Office to go on some of the services’ 

accreditation visits to provide oversight of the implementation efforts. The 

task force mentioned, however, that to be effective, program evaluation 

must be ongoing and fully integrated.

Although the DOD Family Advocacy Office has established output metrics 

that somewhat relate to certain recommendations, DOD has not 

established results-oriented performance measures that could enable it to

evaluate compliance with the recommendations. One example of an 

established DOD metric is the number of briefings to new unit 

commanders and senior enlisted personnel on domestic abuse and child 

abuse. A DOD Family Advocacy Program official stated that this metric is 

intended to be an output measure related to the Government Performance 

DOD Has Not 

Established an 

Oversight Framework 

to Monitor 

Compliance and 

Evaluate 

Implementation of 

Recommendations 

 23 Accreditation is a process of education and improvement for service organizations that 

are committed to achieving quality in management and services. It demonstrates that the 

service has met accepted standards of operation in the Family Advocacy Program. 

Page 25 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
and Results Act24 and is only indirectly related to a recommendation in the 

task force reports. This metric is not a results-oriented performance 

measure that would capture the results or evaluate the effectiveness of the 

briefings in increasing these officers’ awareness of domestic violence 

issues. Without an overall management framework for monitoring and 

reporting on implementation, DOD and Congress will continue to have 

limited visibility and oversight to evaluate the changes associated with the 

recommendations and to make improvements. As a result, DOD may be 

unable to ensure that all of the accepted task force recommendations are 

implemented to produce the desired improvements in assisting domestic 

violence victims and holding offenders accountable. 

Understanding the size and nature of domestic violence is essential to 

DOD’s ability to improve its response to this important issue. Yet the 

department currently lacks the information needed to determine reported

domestic violence incidents. To date, DOD does not have a database 

containing complete information on reported incidents and what actions 

are being taken to discipline those who commit these violent acts. In 

addition, the lack of sufficient personnel threatens the timely 

implementation of the pending task force recommendations. Further, the 

absence of clear and effective communication of the policy changes made

in response to the task force recommendations has hindered 

servicemembers’ awareness of their responsibilities in providing 

assistance to victims and holding offenders accountable. The failure to 

track the training of the chaplains who respond to domestic violence 

incidents impairs DOD’s visibility over whether chaplains are being 

provided with the tools to effectively deal with domestic violence and 

understand their obligations concerning privileged communications. 

Finally, the absence of an oversight framework limits DOD’s ability to 

assess its efforts to achieve the desired results in improving the prevention

of and response to domestic violence. Without further management action 

to address all of these deficiencies, DOD may be unable to effectively 

identify and respond to concerns about domestic violence among 

servicemembers. 

Conclusions 

 24 Pub. L. No. 103-62 (1993). 

Page 26 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
To enhance implementation of the task force recommendations and 

improve the effectiveness of domestic violence efforts, we recommend 

that the Secretary of Defense direct the Under Secretary of Defense for 

Personnel and Readiness to take the following seven actions: 

• Develop, in conjunction with the service secretaries, a comprehensive 

management plan to address deficiencies in the data captured in DOD’s 

domestic violence database that focuses on ensuring that accurate and

complete data exist and that all instances in the Defense Incident-Based 

Reporting System and Family Advocacy Program Central Registry are 

matched and reported annually, as required in DOD’s Manual 7730.47-M; 

• take appropriate steps, in conjunction with the service secretaries, to 

ensure all commander actions related to domestic violence incidents are 

entered in law enforcement systems; 

• develop a plan to ensure adequate personnel are available to implement 

pending task force recommendations; 

• establish a communication strategy for effectively informing DOD and 

service officials about new guidance implementing the task force 

recommendations, to include 

• issuing a revised DOD family advocacy program directive that is 

consistent with interim guidance for implementing the task force 

recommendations; and 

• clearly articulating its policy regarding the distribution of military 

protective orders using a method that will ensure consistent 

application by all services and DOD; 

• develop, in conjunction with the service secretaries, procedures and 

metrics to ensure that accurate, consistent, and timely domestic violence 

training data are collected for chaplains; 

• develop, in conjunction with the service secretaries, chaplain guidance

and training materials that highlight and clarify chaplain responsibilities 

concerning privileged communication; and 

• develop and implement, in conjunction with the services, a DOD-wide 

oversight framework that includes a results-oriented evaluation plan for 

the implemented recommendations, and a process for ongoing monitoring 

of and reporting on implementation.

In written comments on a draft of our report (reprinted in app. V), DOD 

expressed concern that GAO had attempted to define, differentiate, and 

prioritize what it considered important task force recommendations and 

had focused on perceived deficiencies rather than progress. The 

department further noted that GAO’s review had assumed that DOD 

should implement all recommendations of the task force exactly as written 

and stated that after each report the department clearly indicated the 

Recommendations for 

Executive Action 

Agency Comments 

and Our Evaluation 

Page 27 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
recommendations it agreed with, did not agree with, and would study. 

DOD also stated that it never suggested that it could not or would not 

modify any of the task force recommendations. DOD noted that GAO had 

sought to penalize the department for deviating from the narrowest 

reading of individual recommendations. We disagree. To the contrary, our 

report is very clear on the progress the department has made in 

implementing the recommendations. Moreover, the scope and 

methodology for our study (explained in app. I) clearly details the 

approach that we used to assess this progress. Further, in mentioning that 

the recommendations vary in their relative importance to improving 

DOD’s efforts to address domestic violence issues, we simply noted that 

the implementation of some recommendations may not have as significant 

an impact on DOD’s efforts as will the implementation of others. 

Additionally, we did not assume that DOD could not modify task force 

recommendations. As the report states, when counting recommendations 

as being completed by DOD, we included instances where actions taken to 

implement the recommendations were different from language that the 

task force suggested. Specifically, we stated that completed actions were 

grouped into two categories: (1) actions that DOD took that directly 

implemented the task force recommendations and (2) completed actions 

taken that DOD believed met the intent of the recommendation. We also 

made it clear in our report that there were 40 recommendations that DOD 

did not take action on because they did not agree with the 

recommendation, the recommendation was not applicable to DOD, or the 

recommended action was already being done. In addition, we noted in the 

report that there were 60 recommendations where DOD had actions 

pending. 

Regarding our recommendations, DOD concurred that the department 

would take steps to ensure commander actions related to domestic 

violence are entered into law enforcement databases, develop a plan to

ensure adequate personnel are available to implement pending task force 

recommendations, and establish an oversight framework to monitor 

progress and implementation of the task force recommendations. DOD 

stated that it had issued policy requiring documentation of commander 

actions, conducted training to communicate this policy, and would 

continue to aggressively communicate this policy to the services. DOD 

also indicated that it was committed to providing resources to implement 

the task force recommendations and had requested extensions for current 

personnel to do so. We believe this approach could satisfy the intent of our 

recommendation if DOD has a defined plan to provide personnel in the 

event the requested personnel extensions are not granted. DOD said it is 

developing an initial oversight process to monitor progress and 

Page 28 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
implementation and it anticipates completion will be in fiscal year 2007 or

2008. As DOD develops this oversight process, we reiterate the need for it 

to include results-oriented performance measures that can enable it to 

evaluate compliance with the recommendations. 

DOD partially concurred with our recommendation calling for the Under 

Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness to develop a 

comprehensive management plan to address data deficiencies in DOD’s 

domestic violence database. DOD stated that this recommendation is more 

appropriately directed to the Military Departments, noting that it requires 

the services to submit data, but that the systems used by the services are 

insufficient and unfunded. We agree. While we believe the 

recommendation is appropriately directed to the Under Secretary of 

Defense for Personnel and Readiness, who has oversight and stewardship 

for the department’s centralized domestic violence database, we have 

expanded our recommendation to include the services. 

DOD partially nonconcurred with our recommendation to establish a 

communication strategy for informing DOD and service officials about 

new guidance, to include issuing a revised family advocacy program 

directive and reconsidering the task force recommendation on providing 

military protective orders to law enforcement and family advocacy 

officials and communicating associated policies to the services. 

Specifically, DOD agreed with the need to issue a revised Family Advocacy 

Program Directive. However, the department disagreed with the need to 

reconsider the task force’s recommendation to provide military protective 

orders. DOD stated that it has considered the issue of providing the 

protective orders to law enforcement and family advocacy officials and 

continued to believe there are privacy concerns. Given its position, we are 

no longer recommending that the department reconsider the task force’s 

recommendation in that regard. However, because of inconsistent 

practices found among the services regarding whether distribution of 

these orders was allowed to law enforcement and family advocacy

personnel, we continue to believe that the department needs to clarify and 

more effectively communicate its policy on this issue and, therefore, we 

are revising our recommendation to emphasize this point. 

DOD partially nonconcurred with our recommendation to develop, in 

concert with the Family Advocacy Director and four service family 

advocacy program managers, guidance and training materials clarifying

chaplain responsibilities regarding privileged communications. DOD 

stated that the family advocacy program managers were not the 

proponents of chaplains’ privileged communications. We agree and have 

Page 29 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
modified our recommendation to include the services, as well as the 

Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness. DOD also stated 

that each military department has policy addressing clergy confidentiality 

and DOD does not contemplate developing such a policy. DOD further 

stated that it has issued policy requiring this training and noted that DOD 

and the services will continue to address this issue at relevant training 

events. Because we, like the task force, found some chaplains did not fully 

understand their responsibilities concerning privileged communications, 

we continue to believe that DOD needs to issue a departmentwide policy 

on privileged communications, and that DOD and the services need to 

develop training materials that highlight and clarify chaplain 

responsibilities for these communications. 

DOD nonconcurred with our recommendation to develop, in concert with 

the Family Advocacy Director, four service family advocacy program 

managers, and the chaplaincy board, procedures and metrics to ensure 

that accurate, consistent, and timely domestic violence training data are 

collected for chaplains. DOD stated that the family advocacy program 

managers were not the proponents of chaplain training and that this 

recommendation is more appropriately directed to the Military 

Departments. We agree. While we believe the recommendation is 

appropriately directed to the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel 

and Readiness, who has oversight over domestic abuse matters, we have 

modified our recommendation to include the services. In addition, DOD 

further stated that it is inappropriate for the department to engage in 

routine operator-level activity such as tracking training statistics. 

However, it is important to note that the Under Secretary of Defense for 

Personnel and Readiness has established metrics for tracking domestic 

abuse training for commanding officers and senior enlisted personnel and, 

in light of this fact, we continue to believe that the Under Secretary of 

Defense for Personnel and Readiness should also maintain procedures and 

metrics on domestic abuse training for chaplains, who play a critical role 

in assisting domestic violence victims. 

We are sending copies of this report to the Secretary of Defense and the 

Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness. We will also 

make copies available to others upon request. In addition, the report will 

be available at no charge on the GAO Web site at http://www.gao.gov. 

Should you or your staff have any questions about this report, please 

contact me at 202-512-6304. Contact points for our Offices of 

Page 30 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page 

of this report. Key contributors to this report are listed in appendix VI. 

Valerie C. Melvin 

Acting Director, Defense Capabilities and Management 

Page 31 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology 

Page 32 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military

Appendix I: Scope and Methodology 

In conducting our review of the Department of Defense’s (DOD) progress 

in implementing recommendations from the Defense Task Force on 

Domestic Violence, we contacted officials at the Office of the Under 

Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness’ Family Violence Policy 

Office and Family Advocacy Program, Defense Manpower Data Center; 

Army’s Military Community and Family Support Center; Commander of 

Naval Installations; Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for 

Force Management and Personnel; and Marine Corps Family Advocacy 

Program Office. We made 15 site visits to installations in the United States, 

Germany, Japan, and South Korea to collect documentation to assess the 

status of DOD’s efforts to implement the Defense Task Force on Domestic 

Violence’s recommendations. We selected locations based on the number 

of incidents of spouse abuse reported to the Family Advocacy Program 

office from 2000 through 2004,1

 suggestions from DOD and service 

officials, and location—i.e., at least two installations per service 

domestically and at least one per service overseas. At each of these 

locations, we interviewed key personnel in positions such as installation 

commanders, provost marshals, commanders, legal officers, victim 

advocates, family advocacy managers, health care officials, chaplains, 

military police, and senior enlisted personnel because they were identified 

by the task force as having specific responsibilities pertaining to victim 

safety or offender accountability. Table 1 lists all of the installations we 

visited. 

Table 1: Installations Visited During the Review

Service Installation

Army Fort Bragg, North Carolina 

Fort Hood, Texas 

Schofield Barracks, Hawaii

Yongsan Garrison, South Korea 

Navy Naval Station, Norfolk, Virginia

Naval Air Station, Jacksonville, Florida 

Naval Station, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii 

Yokosuka Naval Base, Japan 

Marine Corps Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center, California 

Marine Corps Base, Hawaii 

 1

 We did not verify these numbers. 
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology 

Service Installation

Camp S. D. Butler, Japan 

Air Force Wright Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio 

Hickam Air Force Base, Hawaii 

Ramstein Air Base, Germany

Kadena Air Base, Japan 

Source: GAO.

To determine DOD’s ability to report on domestic violence in the military 

and the disciplinary actions taken by commanders to address these 

incidents, we reviewed and analyzed laws, directives, and other DOD and 

service policies and guidance for reporting domestic violence incidents 

including DOD’s Manual for Defense Incident-Based Reporting System

7730.47-M and DOD’s Manual for Child Maltreatment and Domestic 

Abuse Incident Reporting System 6400.1-M-1. We also reviewed and 

analyzed DOD domestic violence data obtained from the Defense IncidentBased Reporting System, Family Advocacy Program Central Registry, and 

reports to Congress on DOD domestic violence. To assess the reliability of 

the criminal and clinical data systems, we (1) reviewed existing 

information about the data and systems that produced them and (2) 

interviewed agency officials knowledgeable about the data. We also 

reviewed information on the collection methods used to gather, record, 

and report the data mentioned above and verified the reliability of the data

in the Defense Incident-Based Reporting System and Family Advocacy 

Program Central Registry. We concluded that the data from both data 

systems were not complete enough to provide an accurate number of 

domestic violence incidents or commander actions. 

To determine the extent to which DOD has implemented the 

recommendations of the task force as well as the amount of resources 

provided to the office responsible for implementing the recommendations, 

we reviewed Defense Task Force on Domestic Violence reports and spoke 

with members of the defense task force that made the recommendations 

to DOD. In addition, we prepared a matrix summarizing the 

recommendations; obtained DOD’s status in implementing the 

recommendations,2

 along with supporting documentation and evidence to 

 2

 We assessed DOD’s progress in implementing the recommendations included in its status 

matrix submitted on February 15, 2006. DOD continues to complete recommendations and 

submitted an updated matrix March 21, 2006; however, our time frames precluded us from 

corroborating this additional information. 

Page 33 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology 

corroborate implementation; and we interviewed or conducted focus 

groups with officials at the selected installations mentioned above to 

understand the guidance and training received by the officials and assess 

how they are implementing the recommendations. We also obtained from

the installations supporting documentation for many of the implemented 

recommendations, including copies of memoranda of agreements with 

civilian law enforcement agencies, training materials, and guidance on

military and civilian protection orders. Furthermore, we interviewed 

officials at the DOD Family Violence Policy Office, the office responsible 

for implementing the recommendations, and examined budget information 

to ascertain the funding and resources provided to this office. 

To facilitate the data-gathering process for all four questions,3

 we 

developed and pretested our questions and data collection instruments at 

Fort Mead and Andrews Air Force Base, both located in Maryland. We 

identified the content of the instruments through a review of the task force 

report recommendations, service guidance, and other policy manuals. We 

ultimately used three types of data collection instruments at the 15 

installations visited. Specifically: 

• Focus group protocols were used to solicit information from two 

homogeneous groups: military police and senior enlisted personnel. The 

focus group protocol was used to increase the likelihood that the 

questions were asked and procedures were conducted in a standardized 

manner, regardless of which GAO analyst conducted the focus groups 

during the 15 site visits. For each focus group we required a minimum of 6-

10 participants. Participants were assured of anonymity and therefore 

encouraged to openly share their opinions. 

• Advanced questions were sent to six types of officials at the installations 

we visited: unit commanders, legal officials, Family Advocacy Program 

managers, victim advocates, chaplains, and health care officials. The 

questionnaires were sent ahead of our visit and these groups were asked 

to fill out the questionnaires and return them to us before the interview. 

 3

 We assessed (1) DOD’s ability to report on domestic violence incidents in the military and 

disciplinary actions taken by commanders to address these incidents, (2) the extent to

which DOD has provided resources to the office overseeing implementation of the task

force’s recommendations and the extent to which the recommendations have been

implemented, (3) the specific actions that DOD has taken on the recommendations to

ensure the confidentiality of victims and the education and accountability of commanding 

officers and chaplains, and (4) the extent to which DOD has established an oversight 

framework to monitor compliance with and evaluate implementation of the 

recommendations. 

Page 34 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology 

The purpose of the questionnaires was to obtain specific information such 

as training and budget information. 

• Separate discussion group interview protocols were created for eight 

types of officials: installation commanders, provost marshals, unit 

commanders, legal officials, Family Advocacy Program managers, victim 

advocates, chaplains, and health care officials. When possible, we also 

interviewed civilian law enforcement officials around the military 

installation. While some of the questions were the same or very similar for 

some issues, the content of the discussion group interview protocols was 

tailored to the type of official interviewed. 

To determine the efforts DOD has taken to ensure the confidentiality of 

victims and the education and accountability of commanding officers and 

chaplains, we used the methodology for the second question as well as 

reviewed and analyzed DOD’s recently issued confidentiality policy, which 

provides limited confidentiality for victims. We also conducted discussion 

groups with commanding officers and chaplains at the installations visited 

to ascertain the training these officials have received and to address the 

accountability of these individuals. We reviewed and analyzed domestic 

violence training materials obtained from installation officials and officials

at the service training schools to determine (1) the efforts DOD takes to 

educate commanding officers and chaplains, (2) whether such training is

standardized, and (3) whether the training covers topics recommended by 

the task force on domestic violence. Additionally, we reviewed

accreditation reports for installation Family Advocacy Program programs, 

where available, and other materials documenting the effectiveness of 

training programs, such as reports to DOD on training metrics. 

To determine the extent to which DOD has developed an overall 

framework to guide and evaluate implementation, we interviewed officials 

in the DOD Family Violence Policy Office, which is the office responsible 

for implementing the defense task force recommendations. We also 

reviewed and analyzed DOD regulations and guidance and reports 

submitted to the OSD Family Advocacy Program office to ascertain if DOD 

has an overall framework to guide and evaluate implementation of the 

recommendations. The Government Performance and Results Act of 19934

 4

 Pub. L. No. 103-62 (Aug. 3, 1993). 

Page 35 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology 

and Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government5 provided 

model criteria for determining the adequacy of the oversight framework. 

We conducted our review from July 2005 through March 2006 in 

accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 

 5

 See GAO, Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government, GAO/AIMD0021.3.1 (Washington, D.C.: November 1999). 

Page 36 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
Appendix II: Resources Provided to 

Implement Task Force Recommendations 

Page 37 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military

The Military Community and Family Policy Office has managed and 

provided the Family Violence Policy Office with approximately $23 million 

to implement task force recommendations since mid-2003. Table II shows 

funding and projects for fiscal years 2003 through 2005. 

Table 2: Resources and Projects to Implement Task Force Recommendationsa

Projects Purpose FY 03 FY 04 FY 05 Total

Marine Corps Web-enabled 

reporting system

Provide secure Web for the Marine Corps 

child and spouse abuse reporting system 

$175,000 $175,000

Air Force Central Registry for 

Child/Spouse Abuse 

Fund a comprehensive development plan 

for establishing an abuse central registry 

250,000 250,000

Marine Corps case 

management system software 

Provide Marines with case management 

software for managing child/spouse abuse 

reports 

76,000 76,000

Family violence prevention 

fund 

Fund a DOD-wide domestic violence public 

awareness campaign 

400,000 400,000

Family advocacy conference Fund the evaluation of a 3-day joint service 

family advocacy training conference for 

about 600-650 participants 

350,000 350,000

Family advocacy 

demonstration project 

Fund initiatives with potential for worldwide 

application to improve DOD’s response to 

domestic violence 

200,000 200,000

Domestic violence/child abuse 

internet support 

Fund marketing to reach military members 

and their families on the topic of domestic 

violence 

600,000 600,000

Family advocacy training for 

commanders interactive 

training 

Fund a Web-based interactive domestic 

violence training for commanding officers 

and senior enlisted personnel

535,094 535,094

Texas council on family 

violence 

Fund a standardized domestic violence 

intervention public awareness hotline 

campaign 

429,000 429,000

Child abuse hotline marketing Fund posters for child abuse and safety 

hotline 

100,000 100,000

Family advocacy command 

assistance team training 

Fund a 5-day joint service family advocacy 

command assistance training conference 

for 70 people 

81,154 81,154

Family advocacy 

demonstration project 

Fund domestic violence incident reduction 

projects such as collaboration among 

military and civilian police 

155,000 155,000

Victim advocate training for 

chaplains (travel costs) 

Fund travel 19,000 $23,100 42,100

Victim training for professionals Fund a series of conferences for 

professionals in 2005 

2,640,906 2,640,906

Appendix II: Resources Provided to 

Implement Task Force Recommendations 
Appendix II: Resources Provided to 

Implement Task Force Recommendations 

Projects Purpose FY 03 FY 04 FY 05 Total

Victim advocates and shelter Fund the establishing, administering, and 

monitoring of installations that participate in

the program to provide victim advocates 

and/or shelter services to victims of 

domestic violence 

4,571,000 7,500,000 4,800,000 16,871,000

Joint domestic violence shelter Fund the family abuse shelter in Hawaii 396,000 396,000

Travel Fund travel 75,000 3,500 11,000 89,500

Total funding per fiscal year $7,842,248 $10,318,406 $5,230,100 $23,390,754

Source: Department of Defense. 

a

Program analysts in DOD’s Military Community and Family Policy Office noted that contract and staff 

costs were unknown for fiscal year 2003 and staff costs were for a General Schedule 12 and 15 for 

both fiscal years 2004 and 2005. 

Page 38 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
Appendix III: 194 Defense Task Force on 

Domestic Violence Recommendations 

Page 39 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military

Tables 3 through 7 contain the task force recommendations broken out by 

descriptive categories: Community Collaboration, Education and Training, 

Offender Accountability, Victim Safety, and Other. Each table groups the 

recommendations, by our analysis of the Department of Defense’s (DOD) 

actions taken. We split the Completed Actions group into two sections (1) 

actions that DOD took that directly implemented the task force 

recommendations and (2) completed actions taken that they believe meet 

the intent of the recommendation. The No Action Required group consists 

of recommendations DOD classified as complete, but actually disagreed 

with and took no action; recommendations DOD shows as having no 

action required because the recommendation was not applicable to DOD; 

or those recommendations where DOD indicated that the recommended 

actions were already being done. The Pending Actions group consists of 

those recommendations in which DOD, at the time of our review, was still

working on or weighing its response. Not all tables contain 

recommendations that fit under each group identified above. 

Table 3: Community Collaboration Recommendations

Completed actions

Recommendation Documentation to support that implementation is complete

Make violation of a valid civilian order of protection by a 

military member an offense under Uniform Code of Military 

Justice. 

Directive-Type Memorandum: Implementation of the Armed Forces 

Domestic Security Act, November 10, 2003 

Use standard Military Protective Order. Directive-Type Memorandum: Military Protective Orders, March 10, 

2004 

Require written Military Protective Order. Directive-Type Memorandum: Military Protective Orders, March 10, 

2004 

Require initial training for commanding officers with annual 

refreshers. 

Directive-Type Memorandum: Domestic Abuse Response and

Intervention Training for Commanding Officers and Senior Enlisted 

Personnel, February 3, 2004 

With Defense Task Force on Domestic Violence, develop 

standardized curricula. 

Directive-Type Memorandum: Domestic Abuse Response and

Intervention Training for Commanding Officers and Senior Enlisted 

Personnel, February 3, 2004 

Require initial domestic violence training for Senior enlisted 

personnel in key billets with annual refreshers.

Directive-Type Memorandum: Domestic Abuse Response and

Intervention Training for Commanding Officers and Senior Enlisted 

Personnel, February 3, 2004 

With Defense Task Force on Domestic Violence, develop 

standardized curricula. 

Directive-Type Memorandum: Domestic Abuse Response and

Intervention Training for Commanding Officers and Senior Enlisted 

Personnel, February 3, 2004 

Task Force provided DOD with proposed language to send to 

Congress to amend Section 103, title 18, to make it a crime to 

violate a civilian order of protection on federal property. 

Directive-Type Memorandum: Implementation of the Armed Forces 

Domestic Security Act, November 10, 2003 

Appendix III: 194 Defense Task Force on 

Domestic Violence Recommendations 
Appendix III: 194 Defense Task Force on 

Domestic Violence Recommendations 

Train commanding officers on Military Protective Orders. Directive-Type Memorandum: Domestic Abuse Response and

Intervention Training for Commanding Officers and Senior Enlisted 

Personnel, February 3, 2004. 

Forward law enforcement domestic violence issues to Joint 

Security Chiefs Counsel. 

DOD provided documentation that the Defense Enterprise-Wide 

Working Group and Joint Security Chiefs Counsel consented to 

support domestic violence efforts as a result of meetings held with 

each on March 19 and 24, 2003, respectively. 

Create, with Department of Justice, an initiative, including 

financial incentives, to encourage collaborative agreements

between civilian law enforcement/judicial agencies and 

military installations in the areas of information sharing, 

training material and opportunities, programs, and other 

domestic violence resources.

DOD partnered with the Department of Justice and Federal Law 

Enforcement Training Center to create a train-the-trainer module 

based on a coordinated community response to domestic violence. In 

addition to training, DOD and Office of Violence Against Women at the 

Department of Justice are conducting coordinated community 

response projects in two communities with large military populations, 

Jacksonville, FL (Navy) and Clarksville, TN (Army). 

Explore use of state-of-the-art training platforms such as 

Web-based training. 

DOD provided documentation that they explored options and are 

developing Web-based domestic violence training for commanding 

officers. 

Ensure maximum use of treatment/intervention resources in

civilian communities overseas when available and 

appropriate. 

DOD responded that the services report increased collaboration and 

use of host nation resources overseas, where available. 

Adopt and widely disseminate the Commanding Officer’s 

Protocol/Guidelines. 

Directive-Type Memorandum: Establishing Protocols for Law

Enforcement and Command Responses to Domestic Violence 

Involving Military Members on Active Duty, October 22, 2004

Seek partnerships to develop domestic violence prevention

and education programs. 

Directive-Type Memorandum: Domestic Abuse Response and

Intervention Training for Commanding Officers and Senior Enlisted 

Personnel, February 3, 2004 

Recommendation Documentation we found to support actions taken that DOD 

believes met the intent of the recommendation

Amend DODD 6400.1 to require installation/regional 

commanders to seek Memorandum of Understanding with

local communities to address responses to domestic violence.

Directive-Type Memorandum: Establishing Domestic Violence 

Memoranda of Understanding Between Military and Local Civilian 

Officials, January 29, 2004 

Create an enclosure to DODD 6400.1 that provides examples 

of Memorandum of Understanding and guidance in

negotiating the creation and implementation of such 

memoranda. 

Directive-Type Memorandum: Establishing Domestic Violence 

Memoranda of Understanding Between Military and Local Civilian 

Officials, January 29, 2004 

Require copy of military protective order to be provided to 

victim within 24 hours of issuance. 

Directive-Type Memorandum: Military Protective Orders, March 10, 

2004 provides a copy to the victim but not in 24 hours. 

Issue official instructions as follows: Military installation 

officials should seek to establish relationships which foster 

collaboration with community based services for victims of 

domestic violence; local law enforcement departments; local 

prosecutor’s office(s); and local criminal, civil, and domestic 

violence court(s). The ultimate goal being the improvement of 

command awareness of domestic violence issues, 

improvement of the delivery of services to and safety of 

victims, and increased accountability of offenders. 

Directive-Type Memorandum: Establishing Domestic Violence 

Memoranda of Understanding Between Military and Local Civilian 

Officials, January 29, 2004 

Adopt the standard Military Protective Order on page 32-33 of 

the Defense Task Force’s Second Year Report. 

Directive-Type Memorandum: Military Protective Orders, March 10, 

2004 

Page 40 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
Appendix III: 194 Defense Task Force on 

Domestic Violence Recommendations 

Adopt a policy that commanding officers remove and bar 

civilian domestic violence offenders from the installation. 

Directive-Type Memorandum: Establishing Protocols for Law

Enforcement and Command Responses to Domestic Violence 

Involving Military Members on Active Duty, October 22, 2004 

Require notification to gaining commander of pending transfer 

of service member with open Family Advocacy Program 

(domestic violence) case to ensure needed services are 

available at new duty station.

Directive-Type Memorandum: Establishing Protocols for Law

Enforcement and Command Responses to Domestic Violence 

Involving Military Members on Active Duty, October 22, 2004, and 

Directive-Type Memorandum: Domestic Abuse Response and

Intervention Training for Commanding Officers and Senior Enlisted 

Personnel, February 3, 2004 

Request that the Defense Enterprise-Wide Working Group

create a sub working group of the Defense Criminal 

Investigative organizations to address domestic violence 

issues. 

DOD provided documentation that the Defense Enterprise-Wide 

Working Group and Joint Security Chiefs Counsel consented to 

support domestic violence efforts as a result of meetings held with 

each on March 19 and 24, 2003, respectively. 

Establish procedures for returning service/family members to

continental United States following domestic violence incident 

depending on severity and availability of services. 

Directive-Type Memorandum: Establishing Protocols for Law

Enforcement and Command Responses to Domestic Violence 

Involving Military Members on Active Duty, October 22, 2004. The 

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004, Pub. L. No. 

108-136, at 571 (2003), Travel and Transportation for Dependents 

Relocating for Reasons of Personal Safety, stipulates that a spouse 

victim of domestic violence can request shipment of household goods 

and/or motor vehicle provided (1) a commander determines the 

member committed the abuse in question, (2) a safety plan and 

counseling have been provided to the victim, (3) the safety of the 

dependent is at risk, and (4) relocation is advisable. The member must 

consent in writing before transportation will be provided. 

Develop a standard state-of-the-art curriculum for all 

commanding officers and key billeted senior enlisted 

personnel. 

Directive-Type Memorandum: Domestic Abuse Response and

Intervention Training for Commanding Officers and Senior Enlisted 

Personnel, February 3, 2004 

Ensure services provide written guidance to 

training/education commands for domestic violence training.

Directive-Type Memorandum: Domestic Abuse Response and

Intervention Training for Commanding Officers and Senior Enlisted 

Personnel, February 3, 2004. DOD is also developing Web-based

training modules for commanding officers. 

No action required

Recommendation Documentation we found that does not support implementation 

status as complete but as disagreed and DOD’s support for no

action required

Establish standard policy of enforcement of warrants/orders 

on military installations. 

DOD stated that enforcement of warrants and orders varies so 

significantly by location the issue is best handled by local 

memorandum of understanding instead of standard DOD policy. 

Establish and fund a domestic violence response coordinator

position at each major installation. 

DOD officials disagreed with the recommendation and will not take 

action. DOD noted that tasks are currently performed by a 

combination of law enforcement personnel, victim advocates, and 

Family Advocacy Program staff. 

Centrally record and track Military Protective Orders. DOD essentially disagreed with the recommendation and will not take 

action. DOD noted that Office of Secretary of Defense determined it 

would not be feasible to create another database. 

Page 41 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
Appendix III: 194 Defense Task Force on 

Domestic Violence Recommendations 

Require copies to Family Advocacy Program and installation

military police.

DOD essentially disagreed with the recommendation and will not take 

action. DOD stated in its August 8, 2005, report responding to the task 

force recommendations that the Privacy Act restricts distribution of 

military protective orders and that the victim must provide orders to 

Family Advocacy Program and law enforcement if desired. The Office 

of Secretary of Defense and service lawyers told us in interviews that 

this distribution would not necessarily be a violation of the Privacy Act. 

The July 14, 2004, Directive-Type Memorandum, Clarifying Guidance 

Concerning the DD Form 2873, Military Protective Order, does not 

authorize distribution to the Family Advocacy Program or military 

police. 

Provide a list of suggested duties for the Domestic Violence 

Response Coordinator. 

DOD disagreed with the recommendation and will not take action. 

DOD stated that tasks are currently performed by a combination of law 

enforcement personnel, victim advocates, and Family Advocacy 

Program staff. 

Recommend the establishing of such positions at installation 

level. 

DOD disagreed with the recommendation and will not take action, but 

DOD identified it as complete. DOD stated that tasks are currently 

performed by a combination of law enforcement personnel, victim 

advocates, and Family Advocacy Program staff. 

Reconstitute DOD-level Family Advocacy Committee. DOD disagreed with the recommendation and will not take action, but 

identified as complete. DOD stated that other means are currently in 

place to achieve this. 

Require quarterly meetings of DOD-level Family Advocacy 

Committee. 

DOD disagreed with the recommendation and will not take action. 

DOD stated that other means are currently in place to achieve this. 

Require service-level Family Advocacy Committees. DOD disagreed with the recommendation and will not take action. 

DOD stated that other means are currently in place to achieve this. 

Require installation-level Family Advocacy Committee. DOD disagreed with the recommendation and will not take action. 

DOD stated that other means are currently in place to achieve this. 

Charter DOD-level Family Advocacy Committee to 

collaborate among services to improve services, victim safety, 

and offender accountability. 

DOD disagreed with the recommendation and will not take action. 

DOD stated that other means are currently in place to achieve this. 

Select standardized delivery models as specified for training. DOD essentially disagreed with the recommendation and will not take 

action. However, they issued Directive-Type Memorandum: Domestic 

Abuse Response and Intervention Training for Commanding Officers 

and Senior Enlisted Personnel, February 3, 2004, but this directive 

does not address a standard delivery model.

Request Congress enacts legislation making it a crime to 

disobey a civilian order of protection on federal property. 

DOD stated that the recommendation was directed toward Congress, 

but OSD issued Directive-Type Memorandum: Implementation of the 

Armed Forces Domestic Security Act, November 10, 2003. 

Pending actions

Make domestic violence Memorandum of Understandings 

with local communities an item of special interest for the DOD 

and Service Inspector Generals. 

Do not assign overseas service/family members undergoing 

domestic violence program unless services available in 

gaining command. 

Do not assign overseas service/family members pending 

court action for domestic violence offense. 

Page 42 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
Appendix III: 194 Defense Task Force on 

Domestic Violence Recommendations 

Provide promotion materials that advertise family services 

that portray total community. 

Provide promotional materials in language and population 

served. 

Encourage installation representatives to coordinate with 

local, diverse organizations. 

Encourage input of foreign-born spouses in design of 

outreach materials on domestic violence. 

Evaluate Services “best practices.” 

Source: GAO analysis of DOD data. 

Table 4: Education and Training Recommendations

Completed actions

Recommendation Documentation we found to support implementation as complete

With Defense Task Force Domestic Violence, develop 

domestic violence awareness education for all health care

staff. 

Directive-Type Memorandum: Domestic Abuse Identification and 

Assessment Training for Health Care Providers, February 6, 2004 

Require initial domestic violence training for New Parent 

Support Program nurses. 

Directive-Type Memorandum: Domestic Abuse Identification and 

Assessment Training for Health Care Providers, February 6, 2004 

Recommend that DOD issue a policy memorandum regarding

Domestic Violence. 

Deputy Secretary of Defense issued Directive-Type Memorandum: 

Domestic Violence, November 19, 2001 

DOD, with Defense Task Force on Domestic Violence, 

develops domestic violence training for chaplains. 

Directive-Type Memorandum: Domestic Abuse Training for Chaplains, 

January 29, 2004 

Highlight senior leadership policy on nontolerance of 

domestic violence. 

Deputy Secretary of Defense issued memorandum on Domestic 

Violence, November 19, 2001 

Implement standardized medical forensic training for health

care providers in first responder roles. 

Directive-Type Memorandum: Domestic Abuse Identification and 

Assessment Training for Health Care Providers, February 6, 2004 

Explore state-of-the-art training platforms such as Web-based

training for forensic medical training. 

DOD responded that upon completion of commander Web-based

training module, consideration will be given to expanding this platform 

Develop standardized domestic violence training curriculum

for chaplains using outline provided. 

Directive-Type Memorandum: Domestic Abuse Training for Chaplains, 

January 29, 2004 

Recommendation Documentation we found to support actions taken that DOD 

believes met the intent of the recommendation

Initiate domestic violence evidence-based training for Staff 

Judge Advocates. 

Directive-Type Memorandum: Domestic Violence Prosecution 

Training, March 18, 2002 

Conduct Lautenberg Awareness Campaign. Directive-Type Memorandum: Department of Defense Policy for 

Implementation of Domestic Violence Misdemeanor Amendment to 

the Gun Control Act for Military Personnel, November 27, 2002 

Require annual Lautenberg Awareness Education. Directive-Type Memorandum: Department of Defense Policy for 

Implementation of Domestic Violence Misdemeanor Amendment to 

the Gun Control Act for Military Personnel, November 27, 2002 

Page 43 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
Appendix III: 194 Defense Task Force on 

Domestic Violence Recommendations 

Include domestic violence awareness education in basic 

officer and enlisted schools. 

Directive-Type Memorandum: Domestic Abuse Response and

Intervention Training for Commanding Officers and Senior Enlisted 

Personnel, February 3, 2004 

Include domestic violence awareness education in all 

professional military education schools, local training, etc. 

Directive-Type Memorandum: Domestic Abuse Response and

Intervention Training for Commanding Officers and Senior Enlisted 

Personnel, February 3, 2004 

With Chaplain working group and Defense Task Force on 

Domestic Violence, develop domestic violence training for 

Chaplains’ Basic Courses and ensure training for those 

overseas. 

Directive-Type Memorandum: Domestic Abuse Training for Chaplains, 

January 29, 2004 

No action required

Recommendation Documentation we found that does not support implementation 

status as complete but as disagreed and DOD’s support for no

action required

DOD mandate transitional compensation awareness 

education for spouses. 

DOD stated that this is already being done. Since Congress 

established the transitional compensation program, the services have 

routinely educated dependent family members about it. 

Emphasize the need to reach spouses residing off the 

installation. 

DOD stated that Family Advocacy Program provides outreach to 

spouses residing off of the installation. 

Ensure cultural diversity education for those overseas. DOD stated that cultural diversity education is provided by local, 

national, and family center staff. 

Request Congress fully fund New Parent Support Program. DOD stated that it had previously requested and been denied full 

funding for New Parent Support Program. 

The Defense Task Force on Domestic Violence Victim Safety 

Workgroup continues to investigate the issue of transitional 

compensation. 

DOD noted that the recommendation is for the Defense Task Force on 

Domestic Violence, not DOD. 

Pending actions

Develop domestic violence instructions for initial training for 

military police. 

Ensure local military police patrol officers receive domestic 

violence training. 

Create domestic violence mobile training teams for military 

police. 

Develop a list of state-of-the-art domestic violence equipment 

for military police. 

Study adoption of indicator-based screening for domestic 

violence. 

Provide law enforcement first responders with audio visual 

equipment. 

Provide training on the use of audio visual equipment. 

Develop policy on clergy confidentiality. 

Develop standard DOD policy on clergy confidentiality. 

Source: GAO analysis of DOD data. 

Page 44 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
Appendix III: 194 Defense Task Force on 

Domestic Violence Recommendations 

Table 5: Offender Accountability Recommendations 

Completed actions

Recommendation Documentation we found to support implementation as complete

Investigate every domestic violence incident to determine if a 

crime was committed. 

Directive-Type Memorandum: Establishing Protocols for Law

Enforcement and Command Responses to Domestic Violence 

Involving Military Members on Active Duty, October 22, 2004

Ensure services comply with interim guidance on waivers for 

domestic violence-related convictions. 

Directive-Type Memorandum: Enlistment Waivers for Domestic 

Violence-Related Convictions, January 22, 2002 

Review the Lautenberg waivers. A 2001 Office of Undersecretary of Defense Personnel and Readiness 

review of service enlistment waivers found the Services to be in 

compliance with the interim guidance concerning Lautenberg and 

enlistment waivers. 

Develop guidance for formal and informal fatality reviews. Directive-Type Memorandum: Domestic Violence and Child Abuse 

Fatality Reviews, February 12, 2004 

Require results and system change recommendations to be 

completed in a timely manner. 

Directive-Type Memorandum: Domestic Violence and Child Abuse 

Fatality Reviews, February 12, 2004 

Evaluate data collection methods. Evaluation determined Defense Incident-Based Reporting System and 

Family Advocacy Program Central Registry are not interchangeable 

and forced substitution would be a mistake. 

Establish a law enforcement protocol for domestic violence 

investigations. 

Directive-Type Memorandum: Establishing Protocols for Law

Enforcement and Command Responses to Domestic Violence 

Involving Military Members on Active Duty, October 22, 2004

Incorporate into education programs factors for legal and 

commanding officers to consider in responding to domestic 

violence as a crime. 

Directive-Type Memorandum: Domestic Abuse Response and

Intervention Training for Commanding Officers and Senior Enlisted 

Personnel, February 3, 2004 

Recommendation Documentation we found to support actions taken that DOD 

believes met the intent of the recommendation

Develop guidance to capture data required by Section 594, 

Public Law 106-65. 

DODD 7730.47 Defense Incident-Based Reporting System 

establishes guidance to capture data required by National Defense 

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000, Pub. L. No. 106-65, at 594 

(1999). 

Formally evaluate repeat offenders/treatment failures for 

continued service. 

Directive-Type Memorandum: Domestic Abuse Response and

Intervention Training for Commanding Officers and Senior Enlisted 

Personnel, February 3, 2004 

Issue final Lautenberg guidance. Directive-Type Memorandum: Department of Defense Policy for 

Implementation of Domestic Violence Misdemeanor Amendment to 

the Gun Control Act for Military Personnel, November 27, 2002 

Develop guidelines for commanding officers in domestic 

violence substantiation determinations. 

Directive-Type Memorandum: Establishing Protocols for Law

Enforcement and Command Responses to Domestic Violence 

Involving Military Members on Active Duty, October 22, 2004. DOD 

later responded that since commanders are required to consult with 

legal, this is an automatic process because the military attorneys 

consult the Uniformed Code of Military Justice and the Manual for 

Courts Martial and this document contains a list of factors to consider 

when determining whether to substantiate a case. 

Page 45 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
Appendix III: 194 Defense Task Force on 

Domestic Violence Recommendations 

No action required

Recommendation Documentation we found that does not support 

implementation status as complete but as disagreed and

DOD’s support for no action required

Study whether Defense Incident-Based Reporting System should 

replace the Family Advocacy Program central registry. 

DOD disagreed with the intent of this recommendation and said 

the study determined that Defense Incident-Based Reporting 

System and the Family Advocacy Program central registry are 

not interchangeable, and forced substitution of one for the other 

would be a mistake. 

Expand Family Advocacy Program database to comply with section 

594 requirements if Defense Incident-Based Reporting System is 

delayed. 

DOD disagreed with the need to use the Family Advocacy 

Program database to meet the requirements of section 594 of 

Pub. L. No. 106-65 (1999). 

Fatality reviews. DOD stated that the Defense Task Force on Domestic violence 

made no specific recommendations, but pledged to continue

researching issue in conjunction with DOD’s goal of 

implementing domestic violence fatality reviews. 

Pending actions

Train law enforcement, legal, and command to collaborate on 

domestic violence crime determination. 

Require comprehensive, effective batterer intervention. 

Develop criteria for differing interventions. 

Develop criteria for risk/lethality assessments. 

Develop criteria for success in offender behavior after intervention. 

Require domestic violence program evaluation. 

Establish advisory committee to oversee program evaluation. 

Establish a protocol for evaluating field-based domestic violence 

programs. 

Use regional oversight and monitoring visits.

With organizations experienced in domestic violence prevention 

programs, develop an ongoing domestic violence awareness 

campaign. 

Target a program of domestic violence education to grades E1-E4. 

With Department of Defense Education Activity incorporate

domestic violence awareness into dependent schools. 

Incorporate criteria provided by Defense Task Force on Domestic 

Violence into policy update for domestic violence case 

management. 

Fully implement Defense Incident-Based Reporting System at the 

earliest possible date. 

Seek to improve civil-military cooperation to foster victim safety. 

Work with the Department of Justice to implement Military 

Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act of 2000 to ensure proper emphasis 

for domestic violence. 

Source: GAO analysis of DOD data. 

Page 46 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
Appendix III: 194 Defense Task Force on 

Domestic Violence Recommendations 

Table 6: Victim Safety Recommendations

Completed actions

Recommendation Documentation we found to support implementation as complete

Working with Services and Defense Task Force on Domestic

Violence expand the availability of the National Domestic 

Violence Hotline. 

Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness issued a 

policy memorandum: Domestic Violence Awareness Month, October 

1, 2004, and Directive-Type Memorandum: Domestic Abuse Victim 

Advocacy Program, February 17, 2005 highlights the importance and 

availability of the National Domestic Violence Hotline. 

Working with Services and Defense Task Force on Domestic

Violence expand the availability of National Domestic 

Violence Hotline by providing specialized marketing and 

outreach including 1) ensuring that the hotline information and 

community domestic violence resources are included in the 

materials issued by family services, health care, Family 

Advocacy Program, law enforcement, as well as the relevant 

policies communicated from the commanding officers. 

Identifying information necessary to enable the National 

Domestic Violence Hotline to assist military spouse/partner 

callers who are victims of domestic violence, to incorporate 

the provision of appropriate training to the hotline staff. 

Training and information has been provided to National Domestic 

Violence Hotline. 

Explore options to create system of confidential services for

victims of domestic violence. 

Deputy Secretary of Defense issued Directive-Type Memorandum: 

Restricted Reporting Policy for Incidents of Domestic Abuse, January 

22, 2006 

Include in installation welcome packets information on

domestic violence. 

DOD responded that services routinely include domestic violence 

information, Family Advocacy Program and local community service 

information, and information on the National Domestic Violence 

Hotline in installation welcome packets. 

Issue specific information on Family Advocacy Program 

services. 

DOD responded that Services routinely include domestic violence 

information, Family Advocacy Program and local community service 

information, and information concerning the National Domestic 

Violence Hotline in installation welcome packets. 

Direct Services to advise domestic violence victims of legal 

resources. 

Directive-Type Memorandum: Domestic Abuse Victim Advocate 

Program, February 17, 2005 

Document that information on legal resources was provided. Directive-Type Memorandum: Domestic Abuse Victim Advocate 

Program, February 17, 2005 

Collaborate with National Domestic Violence Hotline in 

assessing materials to expand awareness and use of hotline. 

DOD provided documentation that they have collaborated and will

continue ongoing collaboration with the National Domestic Violence 

Hotline. 

Pursue funding for marketing outreach. DOD provided documentation that, at the time of our review, there 

were two domestic violence awareness programs funded and one is 

specifically with National Domestic Violence Hotline. 

Explore hotlines overseas. DOD responded that Military One Source is accessible at all military 

locations. 

Mandate that each Service provide and emphasize a Victim

Advocate Program. 

Directive-Type Memorandum: Domestic Abuse Victim Advocate 

Program, February 17, 2005, based in part on results of feasibility 

study. 

Page 47 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
Appendix III: 194 Defense Task Force on 

Domestic Violence Recommendations 

Seek statutory authority for payment of travel expense, 

shipment of household goods, and, when overseas, privately

owned vehicle, for victims when warranted. 

Pub. L. No. 108-136, at 571 (2003), provides the statutory authority 

and stipulations specified in the recommendations, and are reflected in 

Joint Federal Travel Regulation change number 208, June 1, 2004. 

Specify certain minimum stipulations on authority. Pub. L. No. 108-136, at 571 (2003) provides the statutory authority 

and stipulations specified in the recommendations, and are reflected in 

Joint Federal Travel Regulation change number 208, June 1, 2004. 

Develop policy for safety plans by the Services. Directive-Type Memorandum: Domestic Abuse Victim Advocate 

Program, February 17, 2005 

Adopt safety plan provided by the Defense Task Force on 

Domestic Violence. 

Directive-Type Memorandum: Domestic Abuse Victim Advocate 

Program, February 17, 2005 

Ensure availability of victim advocates to aid in safety 

planning and risk assessments. 

DOD and Services have civilian employees and contracts in place to 

ensure availability of Victim Advocates. 

Ensure access to either on- or off-installation sheltering 

services. 

Directive-Type Memorandum: Domestic Abuse Victim Advocate 

Program, February 17, 2005, and Directive-Type Memorandum: 

Establishing Protocols for Law Enforcement and Command 

Responses to Domestic Violence Involving Military Members on Active 

Duty, October 22, 2004 

Ensure dissemination of shelter information. Directive-Type Memorandum: Domestic Abuse Victim Advocate 

Program, February 17, 2005, and Directive-Type Memorandum: 

Establishing Protocols for Law Enforcement and Command 

Responses to Domestic Violence Involving Military Members on Active 

Duty, October 22, 2004 

Develop policy emphasizing self-determination in safety 

planning. 

Directive-Type Memorandum: Domestic Abuse Victim Advocate 

Program, February 17, 2005, and Directive-Type Memorandum: 

Establishing Protocols for Law Enforcement and Command 

Responses to Domestic Violence Involving Military Members on Active 

Duty, October 22, 2004 

Ensure all continental United States Family Advocacy 

Program staff know about local shelters. 

Directive-Type Memorandum: Domestic Abuse Victim Advocate 

Program, February 17, 2005, and Directive-Type Memorandum: 

Establishing Protocols for Law Enforcement and Command 

Responses to Domestic Violence Involving Military Members on Active 

Duty, October 22, 2004 

Recommendation Documentation we found to support actions taken that DOD 

believes met the intent of the recommendation

Develop policy on who should be removed from military 

housing following a domestic violence incident. 

Directive-Type Memorandum: Establishing Protocols for Law

Enforcement and Command Responses to Domestic Violence 

Involving Military Members on Active Duty, October 22, 2004 

Issue statement from Secretary of Defense on victim safety. Office of Secretary of Defense memorandum, Domestic Violence

November 19, 2001 

Issue specific information on National Domestic Violence 

Hotline and local community domestic violence services. 

DOD response that services routinely include domestic violence 

information, Family Advocacy Program and local community service 

information, and information on the National Domestic Violence 

Hotline in installation welcome packets. 

Include specific language provided by Defense Task Force on 

Domestic Violence on DOD issuance on removal of 

servicemember victim from housing following a domestic 

violence incident. 

Directive-Type Memorandum: Domestic Abuse Response and

Intervention Training for Commanding Officers and Senior Enlisted 

Personnel, February 3, 2004, and Establishing Protocols for Law 

Enforcement and Command Responses to Domestic Violence 

Involving Military Members on Active Duty, October 22, 2004

Page 48 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
Appendix III: 194 Defense Task Force on 

Domestic Violence Recommendations 

Develop guidance for commanding officers on transitional 

compensation pertaining to proper documentation in

separation papers. 

Directive-Type Memorandum: Domestic Abuse Response and

Intervention Training for Commanding Officers and Senior Enlisted 

Personnel, February 3, 2004 

Ensure access to sheltering services within a reasonable 

distance at overseas locations. 

Directive-Type Memorandum: Establishing Protocols for Law

Enforcement and Command Responses to Domestic Violence 

Involving Military Members on Active Duty, October 22, 2004

No action required

Recommendation Documentation we found that does not support implementation 

status as complete but as disagreed and DOD’s support for no

action required

Adopt risk assessment tool provided by Defense Task Force 

on Domestic Violence. 

DOD did not agree with this recommendation. 

Require Services to monitor disposition of separation cases 

due to domestic violence so that they are properly 

documented. 

According to DOD, Pub. L. No. 108-136, at 572-574 (2003) meets this 

recommendation. However, we are unaware of any provisions in the 

public law that direct the services to monitor disposition of separation 

cases due to domestic violence so that they are properly documented. 

Establish policy to provide military sponsored shelter for up to 

72 hours with no mandatory reporting. 

After studying the issue, DOD decided not to implement a 72-hour 

policy. 

Ensure first-responder law enforcement personnel receive 

specialized training in identifying primary aggressor. 

DOD did not agree with this recommendation. 

With Services and Defense Task Force on Domestic 

Violence, review impact of mandatory reporting on various 

factors. 

Defense Task Force on Domestic Violence review found that 

mandatory reporting negatively impacts reporting and that there was 

no need to develop additional criteria to measure effectiveness. 

Instead, Defense Task Force on Domestic Violence recommended in 

the third-year report that DOD abandon the policy in favor of 

nondisclosure. 

Develop evaluation criteria to measure effectiveness of 

mandatory reporting on various factors. 

Defense Task Force on Domestic Violence review found that 

Mandatory Reporting negatively impacts reporting and that there was 

no need to develop additional criteria to measure effectiveness. 

Instead, Defense Task Force on Domestic Violence recommended in 

the third-year report that DOD abandon the policy in favor of 

nondisclosure.

Recommend legislative changes to require starting 

transitional compensation 14 days after Uniform Code of 

Military Justice discharge sentencing or initiation of 

administrative separation action and authorize transitional 

compensation payments for 36 months for everyone. 

DOD responded that Pub. L. No. 108-136, at 572-574 (2003), reflects 

Office of Secretary Defense input. 

Seek partnership with Department of Justice and Department 

of Health and Human Services to pilot a program to provide 

confidential community services to victims who are military 

spouses/partners. 

Defense Task Force on Domestic Violence subsequently decided a 

pilot program was not needed (page 103 of second-year report). 

Pending actions

Expand guidance to give Service Secretaries authority to 

grant transitional compensation in cases of extenuating 

circumstances consistent with the law. 

Direct Services to train legal assistance personnel on 

Violence Against Women Act, specifically immigration issues

arising from domestic violence. 

Page 49 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
Appendix III: 194 Defense Task Force on 

Domestic Violence Recommendations 

Direct Services to train legal assistance personnel on 

transitional compensation. 

Ensure appropriate regulations on this issue are changed and 

consider policy memos from Service Secretaries. 

Collaborate with civilian victim agencies potentially impacted 

by military use.

Initiate public affairs campaign on transitional compensation. 

Ensure funding is reviewed for military shelters and meets the 

needs of the community being served. 

Seek all alternative methods of funding for military shelters. 

Source: GAO analysis of DOD data. 

Table 7: Other Recommendations

Completed actions

Recommendation Documentation we found to support implementation as complete

DOD should work with Defense Task Force on Domestic 

Violence and the Services to develop a new intervention 

process model. 

DOD noted that, in the third-year report, Defense Task Force on 

Domestic Violence recommended an intervention process model. 

Explore all options for hiring and maintaining providers 

necessary to assess/intervene in domestic violence 

overseas. 

DOD noted that exploration was complete and current recruiting and 

retention practices were deemed sufficient. 

Adopt and widely disseminate nondisclosure policy provided 

by Defense Task Force on Domestic Violence. 

Directive-Type Memorandum: Restricted Reporting Policy for Incidents of 

Domestic Abuse, January 22, 2005 

Address Privacy Act issues. Deputy Secretary of Defense issued Directive-Type Memorandum: 

Restricted Reporting Policy for Incidents of Domestic Abuse, January 22, 

2006. 

Encourage commanding officers to discuss issues relating to

domestic violence. 

Deputy Secretary of Defense memorandum, November 19, 2001, and 

Directive-Type Memorandum: Establishing Protocols for Law

Enforcement and Command Responses to Domestic Violence Involving 

Military Members on Active Duty, October 22, 2004 

Ensure commanding officers scrutinize domestic violence 

incidents to determine if Uniform Code of Military Justice 

was violated. 

Directive-Type Memorandum: Establishing Protocols for Law

Enforcement and Command Responses to Domestic Violence Involving 

Military Members on Active Duty, October 22, 2004 

Institute an annual DOD fatality review summit. Pub. L. No. 108-136, at 576 (2003) and Directive-Type Memorandum: 

Domestic Violence and Child Abuse Fatality Reviews, February 12, 2004 

Instruct the Services to establish, train, and maintain on-call

headquarters-level fatality review teams. 

Pub. L. No. 108-136, at 576 (2003) and Directive-Type Memorandum: 

Domestic Violence and Child Abuse Fatality Reviews, February 12, 2004 

Conduct domestic violence fatality reviews as recommended

in prior reports and compose teams as recommended. 

Pub. L. No. 108-136, at 576 (2003) and Directive-Type Memorandum: 

Domestic Violence and Child Abuse Fatality Reviews, February 12, 2004 

Working with Services and Defense Task Force on Domestic

Violence, create a policy to provide confidentiality to victims 

of domestic violence. 

Directive-Type Memorandum: Restricted Reporting Policy for Incidents of 

Domestic Abuse, January 22, 2006 

Page 50 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
Appendix III: 194 Defense Task Force on 

Domestic Violence Recommendations 

Develop policy guidance on victim advocate record-keeping. Deputy Secretary of Defense issued Directive-Type Memorandum: 

Restricted Reporting Policy for Incidents of Domestic Abuse, January 22, 

2006. 

Recommendation Documentation we found to support actions taken that DOD 

believes met the intent of recommendation

In the initial report, the Defense Task Force on Domestic 

Violence developed a definition of domestic violence to be 

used as a working definition in accomplishing its statutory 

mission. 

Although there was no recommendation for DOD action, DOD did study 

this issue and subsequently adopted a definition of its own.

Incorporate the definition provided into DOD policy and 

programs. 

DOD opted to craft its own definition of domestic violence which has 

been utilized in Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness 

policy memoranda. 

Adopt and widely disseminate the Victim Advocate Protocol

provided by the Defense Task Force on Domestic Violence. 

Directive-Type Memorandum: Domestic Abuse Victim Advocate 

Program, February 17, 2005 

Implement a Victim Advocate Program as recommended by

the Defense Task Force On Domestic Violence. 

Directive-Type Memorandum: Domestic Abuse Victim Advocate 

Program, February 17, 2005 

DOD should adopt and widely disseminate law enforcement 

protocol provided by the Defense Task Force on Domestic 

Violence. 

Directive-Type Memorandum: Establishing Protocols for Law

Enforcement and Command Responses to Domestic Violence Involving 

Military Members on Active Duty, October 22, 2004 

No action required

Recommendation Documentation we found that does not support implementation 

status as complete but as disagreed and DOD’s support for no

action required

Ensure overseas employment contracts explain eligibility for 

family advocacy services on a space available/fee-forservice basis. 

DOD initially stated that eligibility is tied to medical entitlement. They 

further noted that Family Advocacy Program services are routinely 

discussed at the New Family Orientation. See Directive-Type

Memorandum: Domestic Abuse Victim Advocate Program, February 17, 

2005. In a March 2006 message, DOD stated that after review, the 

department disagrees with this recommendation. 

Ensure foreign language ability and cultural competencies 

are included in job qualification standards of personnel 

providing domestic violence services overseas. 

DOD stated that their study determined that implementation of the 

recommendation is not feasible. They further noted that the Civilian 

Personnel Office does not require language for Family Advocacy 

Program position. Cultural competence is achieved via newcomer 

orientation and on-going supervision. 

Ensure that Services have ongoing cultural competence 

training programs for all personnel overseas. 

DOD responded that intercultural relations classes are required for new 

personnel upon their arrival in outside continental United States. Also, 

family centers offer a variety of classes to familiarize personnel with the 

local culture. 

Establish victim advocate certification program. DOD disagreed. DOD will continue to offer victim advocate training. 

Establish “appeal-type” mechanism for victim advocates. DOD disagreed. Available mechanisms are sufficient (Service Inspector 

General, Department of Defense Inspector General, etc.). 

Discontinue collecting and reporting severity-level data. DOD studied this recommendation and disagreed. Collection of data will 

continue using the revised severity definition. 

Instruct installations to include fatality review provisions in 

the domestic violence Memorandum Of Agreements with 

civilian jurisdictions. 

DOD essentially disagreed with this recommendation stating that the 

Directive-Type Memorandum addressing memoranda of understandings 

allows the Services to adapt the sample MOUs to address areas of 

civil/military cooperation other than those addressed in the memorandum. 

Page 51 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
Appendix III: 194 Defense Task Force on 

Domestic Violence Recommendations 

Issue 5.B Confidentiality. DOD responded that there were no recommendations for DOD in this 

section of the Initial Report. 

Follow victim advocate recruiting and retention guidance 

provided by the Defense Task Force on Domestic Violence. 

After studying this recommendation, DOD determined current recruiting 

and retention guidance addresses this recommendation. 

Convene a small, independent group with characteristics 

similar to Defense Task Force on Domestic Violence to 

review and report progress of implementation. 

Pub. L. No. 108-136, at 575 (2003), directed the Comptroller General 

review of implementation. 

Identify, evaluate, and prioritize all resources for domestic 

violence programs. 

DOD responded that program funds are allocated annually by Congress 

for Family Advocacy Program, New Parent Support Program, and victim 

advocates and that the department continually evaluates program 

funding. 

Pending actions

Recommend that DOD partner with National Institute of 

Justice and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

to further articulate research agenda and organize scientific 

communitywide requests for applications and peer review 

process of proposals. 

Facilitate and encourage publication in peer reviewed 

journals for completed military domestic violence research. 

This research agenda should not preclude funding of 

research into causes, consequences, and interventions of 

domestic violence in the military through other services’ 

research funding mechanisms. 

Recommend the following research priorities in the following

areas: 

(1) Reliable differentiation of different types of abusers and 

abusive situations. 

(2) What interventions work best for both offenders and 

victims? 

(3) Clarify how well the military-specific approach to 

domestic violence is working and where it should be 

modified. 

(4) Determine actual versus reported prevalence of domestic 

violence. 

(5) Determine which approaches to domestic violence 

prevention work and for whom. 

(6) Evaluate knowledge and consistency of key players. 

(7) Determine efficacy of marital-type counseling for lowlevel domestic violence cases; study men’s and women’s 

use of violence; study impact of lack of confidentiality on 

disclosure and victim safety. 

Adopt and widely disseminate the Offender Intervention 

Protocol provided by the Defense Task Force on Domestic 

Violence. 

Establish standard offender intervention curriculum and train 

intervention staff. 

Develop evaluation standards. 

Page 52 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
Appendix III: 194 Defense Task Force on 

Domestic Violence Recommendations 

Direct the services to conduct ongoing evaluations of 

offender intervention programs. 

Collaborate with Department of Justice to support the testing 

of new models of intervention. 

Examine needs of female offenders and develop a protocol 

and standard intervention curriculum for them. 

Replace the case review committee in adult domestic 

violence cases with a Domestic Violence Assessment and 

Intervention Team. 

Develop DOD Domestic Violence Assessment and 

Intervention Team form. 

Adopt and widely disseminate Domestic Violence 

Conceptual Model provided by the Defense Task Force on 

Domestic Violence. 

Develop joint Service effort for standardizing DOD Domestic

Violence Prevention Program. 

Develop policy for handling low-risk cases. 

Partner with civilian agencies and ensure joint Service 

involvement in pursuing the research recommendations. 

Ensure services conduct timely risk/lethality assessments to 

determine appropriate intervention and command response. 

Ensure one DOD risk assessment grid. 

Ensure services establish a tracking mechanism. 

Source: GAO analysis of DOD data. 

Page 53 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
Appendix IV: DOD’s Directive-Type 

Memoranda and Policy Implementing the Task 

Force Recommendations 

Page 54 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military

Appendix IV: DOD’s Directive-Type 

Memoranda and Policy Implementing the 

Task Force Recommendations 

As of March 2006, the Department of Defense (DOD) has issued 16 

directive-type memoranda to implement the task force’s 

recommendations. Table 8 lists the memoranda and dates of issuance. 

DOD also issued 3 other memoranda that were not identified as directivetype memoranda but were related to the task force recommendations. 

These included the Deputy Secretary of Defense memorandum titled 

“Domestic Violence” dated November 19, 2001; the Assistant Secretary of 

Defense for Force Management Policy memoranda titled “Enlistment 

Waivers for Domestic Violence-Related Convictions” dated January 22, 

2002; and the memorandum titled “Domestic Violence Prosecution 

Training” dated March 18, 2002.

1

Table 8: DOD’s Memoranda Implementing Task Force Recommendations

Directive-type memoranda

Date 

issued

1 Establishment of DOD Database on Domestic Violence and

Procedures for Submitting Domestic Violence Data 

06/2000 

2 Department of Defense Policy for Implementation of Domestic 

Violence Misdemeanor Amendment to the Gun Control Act for 

Military Personnel 

11/27/02

3 Department of Defense (DOD) Policy for Implementation of 

Domestic Violence Misdemeanor Amendment to Gun Control Act 

for DOD Civilian Personnel 

11/27/02

4 Implementation of the Armed Forces Domestic Security Act 11/10/03

5 Domestic Abuse Training for Chaplains 01/29/04

6 Establishing Domestic Violence Memoranda of Understanding 

Between Military and Local Civilian Officials 

01/29/04

7 Domestic Abuse Response and Intervention Training for 

Commanding Officers and Senior Enlisted Personnel 

02/03/04

8 Domestic Abuse Identification and Assessment Training for Health 

Care Providers

02/06/04

9 Domestic Violence and Child Abuse Fatality Reviews 02/12/04

10 Military Protective Orders 03/10/04

11 Clarifying Guidance Concerning the DD Form 2873, Military 

Protective Order 

07/14/04

 1

 Travel guidance was also issued that related to one of the task force’s recommendation, 

titled “MAP 55-03 – Travel and Transportation for Dependents Relocating For Reasons of

Personal Safety”, dated February 24, 2004. 
Appendix IV: DOD’s Directive-Type 

Memoranda and Policy Implementing the Task 

Force Recommendations 

Directive-type memoranda

Date 

issued

12 Establishing Protocols for Law Enforcement and Command 

Responses to Domestic Violence Involving Military Members on 

Active Duty 

10/22/04

13 Domestic Abuse Victim Advocate Program 02/17/05

14 Notification of Department of Defense-Related Fatalities Due to 

Domestic Violence or Child Abuse 

03/04/05

15 Duration of Payment for Transitional Compensation for Abused 

Dependents 

06/14/05

16 Restricted Reporting Policy for Incidents of Domestic Violence 01/22/06

Source: GAO analysis of DOD data. 

Page 55 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
Appendix V: Comments from the Department 

of Defense 

Page 56 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military

Appendix V: Comments from the Department 

of Defense 
Appendix V: Comments from the Department 

of Defense 

Page 57 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
Appendix V: Comments from the Department 

of Defense 

Page 58 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
Appendix V: Comments from the Department 

of Defense 

Page 59 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military
Appendix VI: 

A

GAO Contact and Staff 

cknowledgments 

Page 60 GAO-06-540 Domestic Violence in the Military

Appendix VI: GAO Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgments 

Valerie C. Melvin, (202) 512-6304 

In addition to the person named above, Laura L. Durland, Assistant 

Director; James R. Bancroft; Renee S. Brown; Robert B. Brown; Carissa D. 

Bryant; Marion A. Gatling; Nicole Harms; Amanda Miller; J. P. Newton; 

Jeanett H. Reid; and Sonja S. Ware made key contributions to this report. 

GAO Contact 

Acknowledgments 

(350723) 
GAO’s Mission The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and 

investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its 

constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and 

accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO 

examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; 

and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help

Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO’s 

commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of 

accountability, integrity, and reliability. 

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost

is through GAO’s Web site (www.gao.gov). Each weekday, GAO posts 

newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its Web site. To

have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products every afternoon, go 

to www.gao.gov and select “Subscribe to Updates.” 

The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 each. 

A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of 

Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or 

more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders 

should be sent to: 

U.S. Government Accountability Office 

441 G Street NW, Room LM 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 

TDD: (202) 512-2537 

Fax: (202) 512-6061 

Contact: 

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470 

Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, JarmonG@gao.gov (202) 512-4400 

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

Paul Anderson, Managing Director, AndersonP1@gao.gov (202) 512-4800

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony

Order by Mail or Phone 

To Report Fraud,

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs 

Congressional 

Relations 

Public Affairs 

PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER