GAO

United States General Accounting Office

Briefing Report to Congressional 

Requesters

August 1999 MILITARY 

PERSONNEL

Perspectives of 

Surveyed Service 

Members in Retention 

Critical Specialties

GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR

Page 1 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life and Retention

United States General Accounting Office

Washington, D.C. 20548

National Security and

International Affairs Division

B-281031 Letter

August 16, 1999

The Honorable Pete V. Domenici

Chairman, Committee on the Budget

United States Senate

The Honorable Ted Stevens

Chairman, Committee on Appropriations

United States Senate

The Honorable George R. Nethercutt, Jr.

House of Representatives

Concern has been expressed within the Congress and the Department of 

Defense (DOD) regarding the ability to retain members of the Armed 

Forces and maintain an adequate level of overall quality of life. The 

percent of military personnel who were away from home due to military 

deployments or training in fiscal year 1998 increased by more than 

60 percent from the percent deployed 10 years earlier, during the Cold War 

period. This increase in personnel tempo has occurred against the 

backdrop of a 34-percent decrease in the number of active duty military 

personnel between 1988 and 1998 and a 34-percent decrease in real defense 

outlays during the same period.

At your request, we are reviewing quality of life and retention in the 

military. One component of your request asked us to address how quality 

of life and retention varies among the military services and between ranks. 

As part of our review of this issue, from December 1998 through March 

1999, we administered a survey on quality of life and retention to 

approximately 1,000 Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps active duty 

military personnel at 5 military installations. Participants were selected 

from the population of individuals at the five military installations working 

in job specialties that DOD believed were experiencing retention problems. 

Given the basis for selection, the results may not be generally applicable to 

other personnel in these or other job occupations located at these or other 

installations. 

DOD has traditionally defined quality of life broadly, including factors 

ranging from military pay to family support services. We adopted the broad 

definition to be as inclusive as possible. We did not examine the validity of 

Letr
B-281031

Page 2 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life and Retention

DOD’s definition of quality of life. We examined which of the quality of life 

factors that had been identified and could reasonably be articulated had an 

impact on decisions to stay or leave the military and how satisfied or 

dissatisfied the military personnel we surveyed were with that array of 

factors.

We briefed your staff on April 21, 1999, on the preliminary survey results. 

This report responds to your request for a report of that briefing. We 

discuss the following survey outcomes in this report: (1) overall intentions 

to stay or leave the military, (2) levels of satisfaction and dissatisfaction 

with the military, (3) factors that affect dissatisfaction and intent to leave 

the military, and (4) factors that affect satisfaction and intentions to stay in 

the military. We plan to conduct a further analysis of these survey results 

and prepare a more detailed report later this year.1

 For example, we will 

examine the relationships that may exist between certain variables, such as 

time in service, marital status, and personnel tempo, and differences 

regarding satisfaction and career intentions.

Results in Brief Overall, more than half of the approximately 1,000 officers and enlisted 

military personnel we surveyed said they were dissatisfied and intended to 

leave the military after their current obligation or term of enlistment was 

up.2

 Dissatisfaction and intentions to leave the military were more 

apparent among enlisted personnel than officers. On average, 52 percent of 

enlisted personnel surveyed said they were dissatisfied with the military, 

whereas 46 percent of officers were dissatisfied. Similarly, 62 percent of 

enlisted personnel surveyed said that they intend to leave the military after 

their current obligation is up, whereas 40 percent of officers said they 

intend to leave.

1

We have several ongoing reviews requested by the Congress that relate to military personnel issues, 

including an historical examination of military retention rates, an examination of issues related to pilot 

shortages, and an analysis of data from a broad DOD/GAO military personnel survey to be implemented 

later this year.

2

We had outside experts, including retired senior military officers, academic and general content 

experts, and a former private industry executive, review our findings. They indicated that the results 

align with findings from some of their recent research efforts on broader samples of some service 

populations.

Letr
B-281031

Page 3 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life and Retention

No single factor appeared to account for these results; rather, many factors 

were sources of dissatisfaction and reasons to leave the military.3

 The 

majority of factors (62 percent) were associated with work circumstances 

such as the lack of equipment and materials to successfully complete the 

demands of daily job requirements, the undermanning of units, the 

frequency of deployments, and the lack of personal time for family. The 

nature of military compensation such as base military pay and retirement 

pay was also important, but these factors accounted for less than a quarter 

(23 percent) of all the factors military personnel were dissatisfied with. In 

addition, the nature of military benefits such as medical care for military 

dependents and access to medical care in retirement accounted for 

15 percent of all the factors military personnel were dissatisfied with. 

The quality of life factors that are top sources of satisfaction for military 

personnel were traditional Morale, Welfare, and Recreation (MWR) 

activities and services, such as fitness and sports activities, as well as 

commissaries and exchanges, and chaplain services. Military personnel 

support programs, including youth and adolescent programs and military 

family support services, were also sources of satisfaction for the officers 

and enlisted military personnel we surveyed. One factor associated with 

work circumstances that both officers and enlisted personnel were 

satisfied with was their immediate supervisors. Although there was relative 

uniformity among officers and enlisted personnel in terms of the factors 

they were satisfied with, officers were unique in conveying satisfaction 

with military values and lifestyle, sense of esprit de corps, and living in new 

locations. 

The survey findings generally suggest that actions to address the retention 

of military personnel in retention critical specialties or to develop effective 

and reliable assessments of military quality of life, should place special 

attention on aspects of military servicemembers’ work circumstances. 

Many of these aspects, including lack of equipment and parts to perform 

day-to-day job functions, inadequate personnel levels, and high deployment 

pace and demands, reduce morale and create barriers that make it difficult 

for servicemembers to spend time away from the job and maintain a 

satisfactory personal life. Improving pay and benefits is an important 

concern for military personnel, but there seems to be a much greater need 

3

Our review of comparable survey data obtained from a recent and broad-based Army personnel survey 

indicated similarities in findings concerning dissatisfaction with the amount of personnel available to 

do work, the amount of time separated from family, retirement benefits, and the quality of family 

medical care. 
B-281031

Page 4 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life and Retention

to address other quality of life issues in the retention of military personnel, 

including the nature of their work circumstances.

Background In 1994, the Secretary of Defense proposed a 6-year plan to address military 

quality of life in response to senior military leaders’ concerns regarding 

personnel tempo, compensation, health care, housing, and community 

support activities. The changing nature of DOD’s mission, changes in 

deployment, a reduction-in-force structure, base closures and 

realignments, and smaller defense budgets had culminated to create 

concerns about military readiness and the ability to retain servicemembers. 

In November 1994, the Secretary added $2.7 billion to the defense budget, 

over 6 years, to fund increases in allowances, barracks, family housing, and 

community support activities. Separately, a $7.7 billion commitment was 

provided to fund military pay raises through fiscal year 1999.

The Secretary’s 1994 quality of life initiative also chartered a Defense 

Science Board Task Force to study military housing, personnel tempo, and 

community and family services. The task force was not directed to study 

other elements of quality of life, including compensation and medical care, 

because these elements were being reviewed by other organizations. In 

October 1995, the task force reported and made recommendations to 

improve military quality of life. DOD officials indicate that improvements 

include (1) upgrading standards of living (housing) and enhancing 

unaccompanied housing; (2) providing better child care facilities, more 

child care spaces, and more funds for the family advocacy program and the 

new parent support program; (3) improving fitness facilities; and 

(4) establishing a standard measure of personnel tempo and setting 

personnel tempo goals. The officials also indicate that the fewest 

accomplishments have been made regarding changes in personnel tempo 

and privatization of military housing. 

To support and implement the task force recommendations, an internal 

DOD Quality of Life Executive Committee was also chartered under DOD’s 

1994 quality of life initiative. This committee continues to meet to work 

quality of life issues in a forum, inviting leadership from all services.

Today, DOD identifies the following as its quality of life priorities: 

(1) funding raises in basic pay and improving the fairness and efficiency of 

other elements of compensation; (2) driving personnel tempo as low as 

possible without jeopardizing mission and readiness; (3) providing 

servicemembers and their families’ safe, modern communities and housing; 
B-281031

Page 5 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life and Retention

(4) making education opportunities a cornerstone of DOD’s quality of life 

programs; (5) ensuring parity in quality of life programs across installations 

and services; and (6) building a solid communication line to 

servicemembers and their families so as to understand their perceptions on 

quality of life.

Agency Comments and 

Our Evaluation

DOD provided written comments on a draft of this report (see app. IV). 

DOD stated it did not disagree with “the overall thrust” of our report. DOD 

said its efforts to improve overall quality of life is fairly well documented in 

our report and that the report reflects DOD’s efforts to “Put People First.” 

DOD stated that our survey validates its position that no single factor 

impacts individual retention decisions. 

DOD agreed that the survey results may not be generally applicable to 

other personnel but expressed concern that several of the generalizations 

made from the survey could suggest that shortcomings exist DOD-wide in 

the general workforce climate. We did not, however, generalize the results 

of our survey. Our survey results reflect the views of approximately 1,000 

military personnel in retention critical specialties. Given the basis for 

sample selection, we stated that the results may not be generally 

applicable.

DOD disagreed with the draft report’s reference that few accomplishments 

have been made regarding changes in personnel tempo and privatization of 

military housing. We did not state that few accomplishments had been 

made. We stated that DOD officials indicate that the fewest 

accomplishments have been made regarding changes in personnel tempo 

and privatization of military housing. DOD officials told us that, in 

response to the 1995 Defense Science Board Task Force recommendations 

to improve military quality of life, some improvements had been made in 

the areas of housing, childcare, fitness facilities, and personnel tempo. 

However, they noted that the fewest accomplishments had been made in 

the areas of personnel tempo and the privatization of military housing.4

4

We did not review DOD’s progress on the Defense Science Board’s quality of life recommendations. 

However, we previously reported on DOD’s progress on the military privatization housing initiative in 

our report entitled, Military Housing: Privatization Off to a Slow Start and Continued Management 

Attention Needed (GAO/NSIAD-98-178, July 17, 1998).
B-281031

Page 6 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life and Retention

DOD stated that our definition of quality of life was expanded beyond the 

traditional DOD definition to issues that included spare parts and 

equipment and unit manning. We agree that there are quality of life factors 

in our survey, including one that pertains to the availability of needed, 

parts, and equipment and another concerning the level of unit manning that 

are not within DOD’s traditional definition of quality of life. Our study 

approach began by adopting the definition of quality of life consistent with 

DOD’s broad definition. However, in our efforts to be as inclusive as 

possible, as we note in our methodology description, we also obtained 

input from independent experts and active duty military personnel and we 

reviewed quality of life and general personnel surveys developed or used in 

academic settings, the private sector, and individual military services. The 

final instrument we used contained 44 military quality of life factors that 

were identified through this process and that could reasonably be 

articulated. DOD’s most recently developed survey to assess attitudes and 

perceptions of military life, scheduled for implementation in October 1999, 

now also includes items to measure military personnel satisfaction with the 

availability of parts and equipment as well as the level of unit manning.

DOD expressed concern with our finding that actions to address the 

retention of military personnel in retention critical specialties or to develop 

effective and reliable assessments of military quality of life, should place 

special attention on aspects of military servicemembers’ work 

circumstances. DOD stated this may infer that less attention needs to be 

paid to other areas of quality of life. DOD believes that a “holistic 

approach,” as outlined in its overall quality of life strategy, is more 

conducive to achieving desired organizational outcomes. While we agree 

that obtaining information across a broad spectrum of quality of life issues 

is appropriate, priorities must be set given limited resources. Specifically, 

there is a need to target options to maximize the return on related 

investments.

We believe that our survey results provide relevant information on the 

quality of life factors that are most dissatisfying among a sample of military 

personnel in retention critical specialties and that this information has 

implications for the priorities in DOD’s overall quality of life strategy. The 

views of approximately 1,000 military personnel converged to show that

62 percent of the quality of life factors they were most dissatisfied with 

were related to work circumstances, including the lack of equipment and 

materials to successfully complete the demands of daily job requirements, 

the undermanning of units, the frequency of deployments, and the lack of
B-281031

Page 7 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life and Retention

personal time for family.5 Further, three of the top five most frequently 

selected reasons to leave the military were also related to military 

personnel’s work circumstances, including the frequency of deployments, 

the lack of materials and equipment to successfully complete the demands 

of daily job requirements, and the undermanning of units. 

DOD’s quality of life strategy recognizes that “military personnel want good 

pay, educational opportunities, meaningful work, challenging off-duty 

opportunities, and good places to live.” While we recognize this strategy 

and the themes it emphasizes, we believe that work circumstances are 

central to quality of life for the military personnel we surveyed and warrant 

attention. Our study highlights the relative distinction of work 

circumstances compared to other issues, including pay and benefits; in 

accounting for the majority of quality of life factors a sample of military 

personnel working in retention critical specialties were dissatisfied with 

and most frequently identified as reasons to leave the military. In addition, 

the results of both of DOD’s most recent (1995;1998) Health Related 

Behaviors Surveys of military personnel have shown that being away from 

family and increases in workload, both related to work circumstances, 

were the two most frequently cited sources of causing “a great deal” or a 

“fairly large amount” of stress among military personnel. 

Scope and 

Methodology

A total of 986 active duty military personnel completed the survey.6 We 

administered the survey between December 1998 and March 1999 at the 

Army’ s Fort Drum, New York; the Navy’s Norfolk Navy Base, Virginia; the 

Air Force’s Langley Air Force Base, Virginia; and the Marine Corps’ Camp 

Lejeune and New River Air Station, North Carolina. We administered the 

survey in person at the military installations in group sessions of 10 to 20 

people typically over the course of 2 days or until all scheduled participants 

had completed the survey.7

 The survey was anonymous.

5

Of the 44 quality of life factors included in our survey, 41 percent were broadly related to work 

circumstances.

6

A total of 739 enlisted military personnel, 210 commissioned officers and 34 warrant officers 

participated. Three participants did not indicate their paygrade/rank. Warrant officers are not included 

in the data reported. 

7

We also conducted focus groups with approximately 400 survey participants. We plan to discuss these 

results in our final report.
B-281031

Page 8 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life and Retention

Participants were selected from the population of individuals at five 

military installations working in occupational specialties that were among 

service-identified specialties judged to be critical from a retention 

standpoint. Examples of these occupations include intelligence analysts, 

military police, computer programmers and operators, electronics 

technicians, avionics specialists, and pilots and navigators.8

 Installations 

were selected where a reasonable mix of individuals in those occupations 

were located. We sought to obtain equal numbers of participants from each 

service and to randomly select survey participants to the extent possible 

from installation personnel roster data, using the targeted job occupations 

as the primary selection criterion. However, not all randomly selected 

individuals participated. Some selected participants were unavailable the 

day we administered the survey, some of the installation personnel roster 

information was incomplete or inaccurate, and therefore, some selected 

personnel were not at the designated location, and a bomb threat during 

one installation visit required us to cancel two survey sessions. As a result, 

we asked DOD officials at each of the five installations to help us identify 

additional military personnel to participate in the survey. Randomly 

selected individuals who were unavailable to participate were replaced, 

where possible, with individuals from like military specialties. We did not 

ask participants to provide their name or other personally identifying 

information on the survey. Therefore, it is not possible to determine the 

final proportion of the sample that was randomly or nonrandomly selected. 

Given the basis of sample selection, the results may not be generally 

applicable to other personnel in these or other occupations located at these 

or other installations.

In developing the survey, we began by adopting the definition of quality of 

life consistent with DOD’s broad definition. However, we also reviewed 

published and available survey instruments used to measure quality of life 

or to survey general personnel issues developed in academic settings, the 

private sector, DOD, and the individual military services. To further guide 

the inclusion of appropriate items, we reviewed the literature on quality of 

life and employee retention for both military and civilian populations and 

we interviewed active duty military personnel. The survey was field tested 

to check for clarity, relevance, and completion time and changes were 

made where appropriate. 

8

Tables I.1-2 include a list of the occupations of the enlisted military personnel and officers who 

participated in the survey. 
B-281031

Page 9 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life and Retention

We had a panel of independent experts, including retired senior military 

officers, academic and general content experts, and a former private 

industry executive, review the survey and provide comments that were 

incorporated where appropriate. In addition, at the start of focus group 

discussions, we solicited feedback from the participants regarding the 

survey’s adequacy (or inadequacy) in addressing relevant quality of life 

issues. The consensus was that the survey adequately covered the quality 

of life areas that mattered to them in thinking about decisions to stay or 

leave the military.

The survey contained eight general categories of questions representing 

different elements of military quality of life. Each category had 

approximately six items that the participants rated their satisfaction or 

dissatisfaction with on a 5-point scale.9

 The survey also included items to 

obtain intentions to stay or leave the military, background and 

demographic information, workload and deployment tempo, training, and 

other issues.10 Since the survey did not include an exhaustive list of all 

possible quality of life factors, participants were given an opportunity to 

provide written comments on any quality of life issue they wished to on the 

last page of the survey.11 Approximately 500 participants, more than half of 

the sample, provided written comments that were predominantly negative 

in tone. They included references to multiple military personnel issues that 

needed to be addressed to improve quality of life, including recurrent 

references to career-related issues such as promotions and the quality of 

the force. We plan to systematically analyze the written comments and 

discuss the results in our final report.

We conducted our review between October 1998 and June 1999 in 

accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.

This report is organized into four briefing sections. Section I discusses the 

survey results concerning intentions to stay and leave the military. Section 

II discusses the survey results concerning levels of satisfaction and 

9

The eight quality of life categories included in the survey were Current Monetary Compensation; 

Current Military Benefits; Retirement Benefits; Military Career Issues; Work Circumstances; Military 

Culture; Family Support Services; and Other Issues. Examples of items under the Work Circumstances 

category include personal workload,availability of needed equipment, parts and materials, and level of 

unit manning. In summarizing the results, we collapsed the eight categories to three broad categories: 

Work Circumstances, Military Compensation, and Military Benefits. 

10Tables II.1-4 include a profile of Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps survey participants.

11The survey form is in appendix III.
B-281031

Page 10 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life and Retention

dissatisfaction with the military. Section III discusses the survey results 

concerning sources of dissatisfaction and reasons to leave the military. 

Section IV discusses survey results concerning sources of satisfaction and 

reasons to stay in the military.

As agreed with your office, unless you publicly announce its contents 

earlier, we plan no further distribution of this report until 30 days from its 

issue date. At that time, we will send copies of this report to other 

appropriate congressional committees. We will also send copies to the 

Honorable William S. Cohen, Secretary of Defense; the Honorable Louis 

Caldera, Secretary of the Army; the Honorable Richard Danzig, Secretary of 

the Navy; the Honorable F. Whitten Peters, Secretary of the Air Force; and 

General James L. Jones, Commandant of the Marine Corps. We will also 

make copies available to others upon request.

If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please contact me 

at (202) 512-3092. Key contributors to this assignment were 

John Oppenheim, Carolyn Copper, and Yeewan Tom.

Kwai-Cheung Chan, Director

Special Studies and Evaluation Issues
Page 11 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life and Retention
Page 12 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life Retention

Contents

Letter 1

Briefing Section I

Intention to Stay or 

Leave the Military 

Among Surveyed 

Military Personnel

14

Briefing Section II

Satisfaction and 

Dissatisfaction With 

the Military Among 

Surveyed Military 

Personnel

16

Briefing Section III

Quality of Life Factors 

That Were Dissatisfiers 

and Reasons to Leave

18

Briefing Section IV

Quality of Life Factors 

That Were Satisfiers 

and Reasons to Stay

28

Appendix I

Occupational 

Specialties of Survey 

Participants

34
Contents

Page 13 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life Retention

Appendix II

Profile of Survey 

Participants

36

Appendix III

Survey Instrument

40

Appendix IV

Comments From the 

Department of Defense

48

Tables Table I.1: Occupations of Enlisted Military Personnel 34

Table I.2: Occupations of Officers 35

Table II.1: Profile of Army Sample (Fort Drum) 36

Table II.2: Profile of Navy Sample (Norfolk Naval Base) 37

Table II.3: Profile of Air Force Sample (Langley Air Force Base) 38

Table II.4: Profile of Marine Corps Sample (Camp Lejeune and 

New River Marine Corps Air Station) 39

Abbreviations

DOD Department of Defense

MWR Morale, Welfare, and Recreation
Page 14 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life Retention

Briefing Section I

Intention to Stay or Leave the Military Among 

Surveyed Military Personnel onISnBigefctri

Note: Sample size for officers; Army n = 40; Navy n = 55; Air Force n = 45; Marine Corps n = 70. 

Sample size for enlisted personnel; Army n = 175; Navy n = 217; Air Force n = 166; Marine Corps 

n = 180. The percents above do not add to 100 because respondents who indicated they were unsure 

of their decision to stay or leave are not included.

Percent of Surveyed Servicemembers in Retention Critical

Specialties Who Intend to Stay or Leave the Military

 Officers

Leave Stay

Army 53% 35%

Navy 33% 37%

Air Force 31% 42%

Marine 44% 39%

Corps

 Enlisted

Leave Stay

55% 26%

75% 15%

70% 18%

48% 34%
Briefing Section I

Intention to Stay or Leave the Military 

Among Surveyed Military Personnel

Page 15 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life Retention

Participants were asked to indicate, on a 5-point scale, whether they 

intended to stay or leave the military after their current obligation/term was 

up.1

 A greater proportion of surveyed officers in the Navy and the Air Force 

indicated an intention to stay in the military rather than leave. More than 

half of the Army officers indicated intentions to leave the military and a 

higher percentage of Marine Corps officers indicated intentions to leave, 

rather than stay in the military.2

In contrast to officers, in all services more of the enlisted personnel 

surveyed indicated intentions to leave the military after their current term 

of enlistment was up.3

 In the Army, the Navy, and the Air Force, more than 

50 percent of enlisted personnel indicated an intention to leave the military. 

The percent of Navy enlisted personnel indicating an intention to leave was 

the largest relative to the other services. Less than 50 percent of Marine 

Corps enlisted personnel indicated an intention to leave the military. This 

is the smallest percent relative to the other services.

1

The results reflect the percentage that said (1) they somewhat intended to leave, definitely intended to 

leave or had to leave and (2) they somewhat intended to stay or definitely intended to stay. 

2

One possible reason for the differences in these service-specific rates may be related to differences in 

the years of service of the survey participants from each service. For example, while the Army officers 

indicated the highest intent to leave among the services, they also had the lowest average number of 

years of service invested in a military career.

3

Between 1988 and 1998 officer continuation rates were higher than enlisted personnel retention rates 

across the services, indicating that officers were more likely to stay than leave the military compared to 

enlisted personnel.
Page 16 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life Retention

Briefing Section II

Satisfaction and Dissatisfaction With the 

Military Among Surveyed Military Personnel nSoBnIigefctri

Note: Sample size for officers; Army n = 40; Navy n = 55; Air Force n = 45, Marine Corps n = 70. 

Sample size for enlisted personnel; Army n = 175; Navy n = 217; Air Force n = 166; Marine Corps 

n = 180. Some respondents indicated that they were neither dissatisfied nor satisfied, therefore, the 

percents do not add to 100.

Percent of Surveyed Servicemembers in Retention

Critical Specialties Who Are Satisfied and Dissatisfied

With the Military

Officers

Dissatisfied Satisfied

Army 43% 50%

Navy 65% 29%

Air 36% 53%

Force

Marine 39% 57%

Corps

Enlisted

Dissatisfied Satisfied

46% 31%

59% 29%

64% 28%

37% 47%
Briefing Section II

Satisfaction and Dissatisfaction With the 

Military Among Surveyed Military Personnel

Page 17 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life Retention

Participants were asked to indicate, on a 5-point scale, their overall 

satisfaction with the military.1

 At least 50 percent of surveyed officers in the 

Army, the Air Force, and the Marine Corps were satisfied with the military. 

However, 65 percent of Navy officers were dissatisfied with the military. 

More Navy officers were dissatisfied with the military than any other 

officer or enlisted group. 

In contrast, in all services except the Marine Corps, more enlisted 

personnel were dissatisfied than satisfied with the military. The percent of 

Air Force enlisted personnel who were dissatisfied was the highest among 

the services. The percent of Marine Corps enlisted personnel who were 

satisfied with the military was the highest among services. This was also 

the case regarding the percent of Marine Corps enlisted personnel 

indicating an intention to stay in the military, although a higher percent 

indicated they were satisfied (47 percent) than would stay (34 percent).

1

The results reflect the percents that were very or somewhat dissatisfied and very or somewhat 

satisfied. 
Page 18 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life and Retention

Briefing Section III

Quality of Life Factors That Were Dissatisfiers 

and Reasons to Leave noBSIigefcrti

The findings in the next two briefing sections summarize survey 

respondents’ opinions regarding quality of life factors. First, briefing 

section III shows (1) the factors that survey respondents indicated the most 

dissatisfaction with and (2) the factors that were most frequently identified 

as being reasons to leave by the respondents who said that they intended to 

leave at the end of their current enlistment/obligation. Second, briefing 

section IV shows (1) the factors that survey respondents were most 

satisfied with and (2) the reasons that were most frequently identified as 

being reasons to stay by those servicemembers who said that they intended 

to stay in the military. 

Two analytic points regarding the information in briefing sections III and IV 

are pertinent. First, factors that are dissatisfiers may also be reasons why 

people leave the military, although not everyone who is dissatisfied will be 

inclined to leave. Similarly, not everyone who is satisfied will stay in the 

military and factors that servicemembers are most satisfied with may not 

necessarily be the strongest reasons to stay in the military. Additional 

analyses will be included in our final report, examining these more 

complex relationships. 

Second, at about the same time that our survey began, DOD announced 

that it would include in its fiscal year 2000 budget proposal a change in the 

military retirement system reinstating the opportunity to receive 50 percent 

of base pay after 20 years of service, rather than the current level of 

40 percent of base pay after 20 years of service for military personnel who 

entered the service after 1986. Further, DOD announced that a military pay 

increase would also be included as part of its fiscal year 2000 budget 

proposal.1

 DOD officials stated that the rationale for the change in 

retirement was that the current level of retirement pay was a major factor 

in the ability to retain military personnel and that military personnel were 

dissatisfied with their retirement benefits. The proposed military pay 

increase was also said to address retention concerns. DOD’s pay and 

retirement proposals were highly publicized and received extensive news

1

At the time this report was being prepared Congress was considering DOD’s budget request as part of 

its authorization and appropriations process for fiscal year 2000.
Briefing Section III

Quality of Life Factors That Were 

Dissatisfiers and Reasons to Leave

Page 19 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life and Retention

coverage that could have affected the salience of retirement pay and base 

pay as a dissatisfier and/or a reason to leave the military among the 

participants in our survey who became aware of them. However, after the 

fact, it is impossible to precisely quantify the effect this may have had on 

the survey respondents. 
Briefing Section III

Quality of Life Factors That Were 

Dissatisfiers and Reasons to Leave

Page 20 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life and Retention

Note: Officers, n = 210; Enlisted personnel, n = 739

Rank Order of Quality of Life Factors Surveyed

Servicemembers in Retention Critical Specialties Were

Dissatisfied With

Officers

1. Availability of needed equipment,

parts, & materials

2. Medical care for military

dependents

3. Level of unit manning

4. Retirement pay

5. Access to medical and dental care

(in retirement)

6. Frequency of deployments

7. Civilian military leaders

8. Ability to spend time with family

and friends

9. Amount of personal time I have

Enlisted

 1. Retirement pay

 2. Availability of needed

equipment, parts, & materials

 3. Level of unit manning

 4. Base pay

 5. Frequency of deployments

 6. Reenlistment bonus program

 7. Morale in unit

 8. Ability to spend time with

family and friends

 9. Medical care for military

dependents 

10. Nature of deployments
Briefing Section III

Quality of Life Factors That Were 

Dissatisfiers and Reasons to Leave

Page 21 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life and Retention

Participants were asked to indicate their level of satisfaction or 

dissatisfaction with 44 quality of life factors. Factors that received a mean 

score between 1.00-2.60, on a 5-point scale, were in the dissatisfied range.2

 

Nine of the 44 quality of life factors rated by officers and 10 rated by 

enlisted personnel met this criterion.

There were differences between surveyed officers and enlisted in terms of 

the specific ranking of the quality of life factors they were dissatisfied with, 

and there were unique dissatisfiers for both groups. First, officers were the 

most dissatisfied with the availability of needed equipment, parts, and 

materials. On the other hand, retirement pay was the top ranked dissatisfier 

for enlisted personnel and availability of needed equipment, parts, and 

materials ranked second. Retirement pay was ranked 4th among officers. 

Unfortunately, the survey results did not enable us to fully ascertain the 

nature of certain dissatisfiers. For example, it is unclear whether concern 

about retirement pay is based on the lack of vesting before 20 years of 

service, the unavailability of tax-deferred savings plans, or the current 

accrual formulas. These issues will be explored further in a separate 

DOD/GAO survey later this year.

Differences between officers and enlisted personnel concerning 

dissatisfaction with retirement pay may be partially explained by the fact 

that a larger percent of the enlisted personnel surveyed (79 percent), 

compared to officers (59 percent), entered the service after July 31, 1986, 

and are therefore under the “Redux” retirement plan. Military personnel 

under the Redux retirement system receive a smaller percentage of their 

base pay in retirement than personnel not under the Redux plan.

Officers had three unique dissatisfiers and enlisted had four. The three 

dissatisfiers that were unique to the officers we surveyed were civilian 

military leaders, amount of personal time, and access to medical and dental 

care in retirement. The four dissatisfiers that were unique to the enlisted 

personnel surveyed were base pay, reenlistment bonus program, morale in 

the unit, and the nature of deployments.

2

Factors meeting this criterion are referred to as “dissatisfiers”. We chose 2.6 as the criterion because 

there was a clearer separation in mean scores at this level than at 2.5. 
Briefing Section III

Quality of Life Factors That Were 

Dissatisfiers and Reasons to Leave

Page 22 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life and Retention

Our preliminary analysis indicated that the nature of work circumstances 

for military personnel generally accounted for the majority of all the factors 

that military personnel were dissatisfied with (62 percent).3

 These include 

the availability of needed equipment, parts, and materials; levels of unit 

manning; frequency of deployments; civilian military leaders; amount of 

personal time available; ability to spend time with family and friends; 

morale in the unit; and the nature of deployments. The nature of military 

compensation accounted for less than a quarter (23 percent) of all the 

factors military personnel were dissatisfied with.4

 These include 

retirement pay, base pay, and reenlistment bonus programs. The nature of 

military benefits accounted for 15 percent of all the factors military 

personnel were dissatisfied with.5

 These include medical care for military 

dependents and access to medical and dental care in retirement. 

3

Forty-one percent of the 44 quality of life factors included in the survey were broadly related to work 

circumstances.

4

Fourteen percent of the 44 quality of life factors included in the survey were broadly related to military 

compensation. 

5

Forty-five percent of the 44 quality of life factors in the survey were broadly related to military benefits.
Page 23 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life and Retention
Briefing Section III

Quality of Life Factors That Were 

Dissatisfiers and Reasons to Leave

Page 24 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life and Retention

Note: Among officers, retirement pay and frequency of deployments were selected with the same 

frequency. The number of officers who indicated an intention to leave and who provided information on 

reasons to leave was n = 83. The number of enlisted personnel who indicated an intention to leave 

and who provided information on reasons to leave was n = 451.

There are assorted reasons that impact military personnel’s decisions to 

leave the military. As a baseline, participants were asked to identify three 

factors from the list of 44 quality of life factors they had previously rated. 

Participants were not asked to rank order their choices in terms of most to 

least important. Thirty-nine factors, or 87 percent of all of the factors, were 

The Five Most Frequently Selected Reasons to Leave the

Military Among Surveyed Servicemembers in Retention Critical

Specialties Indicating an Intention to Leave

Officers

1. Retirement pay

2. Frequency of deployments

3. Base Pay

4. Availability of needed equipment,

parts, & materials

5. Level of unit manning

Enlisted

1. Base pay

2. Frequency of deployments

3. Retirement pay

4. Promotion opportunities

5. Ability to spend time with family &

friends
Briefing Section III

Quality of Life Factors That Were 

Dissatisfiers and Reasons to Leave

Page 25 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life and Retention

selected as a reason to leave the military by at least one or more of the 

survey participants who indicated an intention to leave the military. 

Among the officers surveyed, there was no single factor that a majority of 

the respondents indicated was a reason to leave the military. The top five 

most frequently selected reasons to leave the military were fairly evenly 

distributed in terms of the number that selected these reasons. 

Twenty-eight percent of officers selected retirement pay; 28 percent 

selected the frequency of deployments; 25 percent selected base pay; 

22 percent selected availability of needed equipment, parts, and materials; 

and 20 percent selected the level of unit manning as a reason to leave the 

military.6

 

Among the enlisted personnel surveyed, 48 percent indicated base pay was 

a reason to leave the military, making this the most frequently selected 

reason to leave the military. In terms of the remaining top five factors, 

23 percent selected frequency of deployments, 22 percent selected 

retirement pay, 21 percent selected promotion opportunities, and 

16 percent selected ability to spend time with family and friends.7 

All of the factors that officers highlighted as reasons to leave the military, 

except base pay, were also listed as dissatisfiers. The fact that base pay 

was not a dissatisfier for officers is consistent with the results of another 

question included in the survey about financial condition. On average,

77 percent of the officers reported that they either were very comfortable 

financially or were able to make ends meet without much difficulty. In 

comparison, 40 percent of enlisted personnel said that they were very 

comfortable financially or were able to make ends meet without much 

difficulty and base pay was a dissatisfier for enlisted personnel overall. 

However, more than one reason suggests that base pay may contribute to 

the stated intention to leave. First, as we noted earlier, responses could 

have been influenced by the attention associated with DOD’s proposed pay 

increase that occurred at the same time as our survey. Second, as might be 

expected, base pay may have been cited as a reason to leave to reflect the 

potential pull of higher paying jobs outside of the military. While we did not 

collect data on this issue, in focus group discussions and written 

6

The percentages will not add to 100 because the respondents selected more than one reason to leave 

the military. 

7

The percentages will not add to 100 because the respondents selected more than one reason to leave 

the military.
Briefing Section III

Quality of Life Factors That Were 

Dissatisfiers and Reasons to Leave

Page 26 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life and Retention

comments, participants referred to the fact that higher paying civilian jobs 

supply one incentive to leave. 

The survey item that asked military personnel to identify reasons 

influencing them to leave did not require them to explain why they selected 

the factors they did. This has analytic implications for those leave factors 

where the core issue, or potential problem, may be more open to 

interpretation (e.g., retirement pay) than factors where the core issue is 

clearer by definition (e.g., frequency of deployments). The other data we 

collected from focus groups and written comments in reference to 

retirement pay issues indicated that military personnel were generally 

dissatisfied with the amount of retirement pay (i.e., the percent of base pay 

received and perceived inequities). However, there were instances where 

military personnel expressed dissatisfaction with the fact that they do not 

become vested in their retirement plan until after serving 20 years in the 

military and the fact that the military retirement system does not offer the 

same type of benefits as conventional private sector or nonmilitary federal 

plans do.
Page 27 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life and Retention
Page 28 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life and Retention

Briefing Section IV

Quality of Life Factors That Were Satisfiers 

and Reasons to Stay noBSIVignectrfi

Note: Officers, n = 210; Enlisted personnel, n = 739

Rank Order of Quality of Life Factors Surveyed

Servicemembers in Retention Critical Specialties Were

Satisfied With

Officers

1. Fitness and sports activities

2. Chaplain services/religious ministries

3. Commissary benefits

4. Immediate supervisors

5. Use of commissary (in retirement)

6. Military values & lifestyle

7. Use of exchange (in retirement)

8. Use of military recreation facilities (in

retirement)

9. Exchange benefits

10. Golf course

11. Education assistance

12.Youth & adolescent programs

13. Living in new locations

14. Dental care for military members

15. Sense of esprit de corps

16. Military family support services

17. DODD & DDESS schools

Enlisted

1. Fitness and sports activities

2. Commissary benefits

3. Chaplain services/religious ministries

4. Exchange benefits

5. Use of exchange (in retirement)

6. Use of commissary (in retirement)

7. Use of military recreation facilities (in

retirement)

8. Education assistance

9. Golf course

10. Military family support services

11. Dental care for military members

12. Immediate supervisors

13. DODD & DDESS schools

14. Youth & adolescent programs
Briefing Section IV

Quality of Life Factors That Were Satisfiers 

and Reasons to Stay

Page 29 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life and Retention

Factors that received a mean score between 3.40 and 5.00, on a 5-point 

scale, were in the satisfied range.1

 Officers were satisfied with 17 of the

44 quality of life factors and enlisted were satisfied with 14 factors. 

The top satisfier for both officers and enlisted personnel was fitness and 

sports activities. Most of the top factors that officers and enlisted 

personnel were satisfied with represent conventional Morale, Welfare, and 

Recreation (MWR) activities, such as fitness and sports activities, as well as 

commissary and exchange benefits and golf courses. Using our broad 

categories, we found that the majority (76 percent) of the quality of life 

factors that military personnel were satisfied with were associated with 

military benefits. The nature of work circumstances accounted for 

24 percent of the factors that personnel were satisfied with. Military 

compensation factors did not account for any of the factors surveyed 

military personnel were satisfied with.

Immediate supervisors was the only work-circumstance-related factor that 

enlisted personnel were satisfied with. Officers also said they were 

satisfied with their immediate supervisors. However, other aspects of work 

circumstances that officers were also satisfied with included military 

values and lifestyle, living in new locations, and sense of esprit de corps. 

1

Factors meeting this criterion are referred to as “satisfiers”. The range for satisfiers was set to 

encompass the same point range as dissatisfiers (i.e., 1.60 points).
Briefing Section IV

Quality of Life Factors That Were Satisfiers 

and Reasons to Stay

Page 30 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life and Retention

Note: The number officers who indicated an intention to stay in the military and who provided 

information on reasons to stay was n = 80. The number of enlisted personnel who indicated an 

intention to stay and who provided information on reasons to stay was n = 166.

According to the military personnel we surveyed, there are assorted 

reasons that impact their decisions to stay in the military. Participants 

were asked to identify three factors that most make them want to stay in 

the military. Participants were not asked to rank order their choices in 

terms of most to least important. As a baseline, they were asked to identify 

these factors from the list of 44 quality of life factors they had previously 

rated. Forty of the 44 factors, or 91 percent of all of the factors, were 

The Five Most Frequently Selected Reasons to Stay in the

Military Among Surveyed Servicemembers in Retention Critical

Specialties Indicating an Intention to Stay

Officers

1. Military values & lifestyle

2. Sense of esprit de corps

3. Retirement pay

4. Military training opportunities

5. Promotion opportunities

Enlisted

1. Medical care for military

members

2. Retirement pay

3. Education assistance

4. Military values & lifestyle

5. Base pay
Briefing Section IV

Quality of Life Factors That Were Satisfiers 

and Reasons to Stay

Page 31 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life and Retention

identified as a reason to stay in the military by at least one or more of the 

survey participants. 

Among the officers surveyed, the top two reasons to stay in the military, 

military values and lifestyle (54 percent selected) and sense of esprit de 

corps (44 percent selected), represent fairly intangible aspects of military 

life. In terms of the remaining top five factors for officers, 30 percent 

selected retirement pay, 18 percent selected military training opportunities, 

and 15 percent indicated promotion opportunities were reasons to stay in 

the military.2

In terms of the top five reasons to stay in the military among the enlisted 

personnel we surveyed, 25 percent selected medical care for military 

members, 24 percent selected retirement pay, 20 percent selected 

education assistance, 19 percent selected military values and lifestyles, and 

14 percent selected base pay.3

Generally, the officers and enlisted personnel did not indicate that the 

factors they were satisfied with were also reasons to stay in the military. 

Among officers, two of the five most frequently selected reasons to stay in 

the military were also satisfiers (i.e., military values and lifestyle and sense 

of esprit de corps), whereas only one of the five reasons identified by 

enlisted personnel were satisfiers (i.e., education assistance). In 

comparison, the reverse generally applied regarding what factors military 

personnel were dissatisfied with and what they indicated were reasons to 

leave the military. For both officers and enlisted personnel who intended 

to leave, four of the five leave reasons, or 80 percent, were also 

dissatisfiers. 

Retirement pay is a reason to stay and a reason to leave the military for 

both officers and enlisted personnel. Our survey results suggest that one 

reason for this may be the career stage of military personnel. Officers who 

said that they intended to stay in the military and that retirement pay was a 

reason to stay, had, on average, completed more than two times the number 

of years of service (i.e., 15 years) as officers who said that they intended to 

leave the military and retirement pay was a reason to leave (i.e., 7 years). 

2

The percentages will not add to 100 because the respondents selected more than one reason to stay in 

the military.

3

The percentages will not add to 100 because the respondents selected more than one reason to stay the 

military. 
Briefing Section IV

Quality of Life Factors That Were Satisfiers 

and Reasons to Stay

Page 32 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life and Retention

Similarly, enlisted military personnel who said that they intended to stay in 

the military and that retirement pay was a reason to stay had served twice 

the average number of years (i.e., 12 years) of enlisted personnel who said 

they were going to leave the military and retirement pay was a reason to 

leave (i.e., 6 years). Military personnel with many years of service 

completed, who are comparatively nearer to retirement, may have 

identified with retirement pay as a reason to stay, whereas those with fewer 

years may be concerned with changes that have occurred in military 

personnel’s retirement pay and may have identified with it as a reason to 

leave.4

 Additional work is needed to ascertain the nature of related 

concerns and comments regarding retirement pay. This will be 

accomplished as part of a separate DOD/GAO survey later this year.

Among enlisted personnel only, base pay shows up as a reason to leave and 

stay in the military. Differences in the career stage of enlisted personnel 

who said that base pay was a reason to stay and leave the military suggest 

one explanation. The enlisted personnel who said that they intended to 

stay in the military and that base pay was a reason to stay, on average, 

served 9 years in the military, while the enlisted personnel who said that 

they were going to leave the military, and that base pay was one reason to 

leave had served an average of 6 years. More years of service is associated 

with relatively higher base pay, conversely, fewer years of service is 

associated with relatively lower base pay. Moreover, the more than

200 enlisted military personnel who said they were going to leave and base 

pay was a reason to leave indicated that they were dissatisfied with base 

pay. In contrast, the less than 25 enlisted personnel who said they were 

going to stay in the military and base pay was a reason to stay indicated 

that they were neither satisfied nor dissatisfied with base pay.

4

Military personnel do not become vested in their retirement benefits before 20 years of service.
Page 33 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life and Retention
Page 34 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life Retention

Appendix I

Occupational Specialties of Survey 

Participants ApenxIdi

Table I.1: Occupations of Enlisted Military Personnel

Each of the broad occupational categories in table I.1, except for 

“craftsworkers” and “other technical and allied specialists” contain the 

service-identified retention critical military specialties that were targeted in 

the survey. For example, included in the “communications and intelligence 

specialists” occupational category are the following Army-identified critical 

occupations: intelligence analysts, imagery analysts, voice interceptor 

specialists, and cavalry scouts. The Navy-identified critical occupations 

included in this category are radiomen (surface) and operations specialist. 

The Air Force-identified critical occupations included in this category are 

air traffic control and crypto-linguist. The Marine Corps-identified critical 

occupations included in this category are counterintelligence Marine, 

imagery interpretation specialist, interrogation-translation specialist, and 

cryptologic linguist (Arabic). 

Occupations of Participantsa

a Service job specialty codes are based on one-digit Department of Defense (DOD) occupational 

codes.

Number in Our Surveyb

b There were 739 enlisted military personnel that participated in the survey.

Communications and intelligence specialists 155

Electrical/mechanical equipment repairers 145

Functional support and administration 108

Infantry, gun crews, and seamanship specialists 92

Electronic equipment repairers 86

Service and supply handlers 30

Health care specialists 12

Craftsworkers 5

Other technical and allied specialists 3

Undecipherable occupationsc

c Participant’s response was either insufficient to identify or did not match any of the service 

occupational codes. Because we did not request names or other personally identifying information on 

the survey, we could not resolve questionable job occupation information after the fact. Therefore, a 

DOD occupational code could not be assigned.

53

No occupations provided by participants 50
Appendix I

Occupational Specialties of Survey 

Participants

Page 35 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life Retention

Table I.2: Occupations of Officers 

The broad occupational category entitled, “tactical operations officers” 

contains the service-identified retention critical occupations for officers. At 

minimum, each of the services indicated that pilots (Apache pilots 

specifically for the Army) were among the retention critical officer 

occupations. Two-thirds of the individuals in the tactical operations 

category are fixed or rotary-wing pilots or navigators. In addition, the 

category contains surface warfare officers (department heads), identified 

by the Navy as a retention critical occupation.

Occupations of Participantsa

a Service job specialty codes are based on one-digit DOD occupational codes.

Number in Our Surveyb

b There were 210 commissioned officers that participated in the survey. Warrant officers (n=34) are not 

included. 

Tactical operations officers 141

Intelligence officers 21

Supply, procurement and allied officers 21

Engineering and maintenance officers 9

Administrators 6

Scientist and professionals 3

Undecipherable occupationsc

c Participant’s response was either insufficient to identify or did not match any of the service 

occupational codes. Because we did not request names or other personally identifying information on 

the survey, we could not resolve questionable job occupation information after the fact. Therefore, a 

DOD occupational code could not be identified.

6

No occupations provided by participants 3
Page 36 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life and Retention

Appendix II

Profile of Survey Participants ApenxIdi

Table II.1: Profile of Army Sample (Fort Drum)

Enlisted Officer

Sample sizea

a Three participants from the Army did not identify their paygrade. Warrant officers are not included 

(n=21).

175 40

Percent married 53 60

Percent single 39 35

Percent divorced 5 3

Percent with second jobs 4 0

Percent financially comfortable 34 80

Percent who entered the service after 

July 31, 1986

90 83

Most frequently selected reason for 

joining the military

Get money for 

education

Serve my country

Average education level Less than 2 years of 

college credits

4-year college degree

Average years of service 5 6

Average hours worked per week on 

current military assignment

49 62

Average weeks away on deployments, 

temporary duty, and overnight training 

exercises in 1998

13

(91 days)

15

(105 days)
Appendix II

Profile of Survey Participants

Page 37 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life and Retention

Table II.2: Profile of Navy Sample (Norfolk Naval Base)

Enlisted Officer

Sample size 217 55

Percent married 47 69

Percent single 37 20

Percent divorced 8 5

Percent with second jobs 13 0

Percent financially comfortable 47 76

Percent who entered the service after 

July 31, 1986

86 65

Most frequently selected reason for 

joining the military

Get money for 

education

Serve my country

Average education level Less than 2 years of 

college credits

Some graduate 

school, but no 

graduate degree

Average years of service 6 10

Average hours worked per week on 

current military assignment

53 60

Average weeks away on deployments, 

temporary duty, and overnight training 

exercises in 1998

19

(133 days)

21

(147 days)
Appendix II

Profile of Survey Participants

Page 38 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life and Retention

Table II.3: Profile of Air Force Sample (Langley Air Force Base)

Enlisted Officer

Sample size 167 45

Percent married 57 82

Percent single 28 11

Percent divorced 7 4

Percent with second jobs 12 0

Percent financially comfortable 37 73

Percent who entered the service after 

July 31, 1986

58 27

Most frequently selected reason for 

joining the military

Obtain job related 

skills

Serve my country 

Average education level 2-year college degree Master’s, doctoral, or 

professional school 

degree

Average years of service 10 14

Average hours worked per week on 

current military assignment

49 53

Average weeks away on deployments, 

temporary duty, and overnight training 

exercises in 1998

9

(63 days)

9

(63 days)
Appendix II

Profile of Survey Participants

Page 39 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life and Retention

Table II.4: Profile of Marine Corps Sample (Camp Lejeune and New River Marine 

Corps Air Station)

Enlisted Officer

Sample sizea

a Warrant officers are not included ( n = 13 ).

180 70

Percent married 51 74

Percent single 41 19

Percent divorced 5 6

Percent with second jobs 12 0

Percent financially comfortable 40 80

Percent who entered the service after 

July 31, 1986

80 59

Most frequently selected reason for 

joining the military

Serve my country Serve my country

Average education level Less than 2 years of 

college credits

4-year college degree

Average years of service 6 10

Average hours worked per week on 

current military assignment

46 58

Average weeks away on deployments, 

temporary duty, and overnight training 

exercises in 1998

9

(63 days)

13

(91 days)
Page 40 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life and Retention

Appendix III

Survey Instrument ApenIxdi
Appendix III

Survey Instrument

Page 41 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life and Retention
Appendix III

Survey Instrument

Page 42 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life and Retention
Appendix III

Survey Instrument

Page 43 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life and Retention
Appendix III

Survey Instrument

Page 44 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life and Retention
Appendix III

Survey Instrument

Lert Page 45 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life and Retention
Appendix III

Survey Instrument

Page 46 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life and Retention
Appendix III

Survey Instrument

Page 47 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life and Retention
Page 48 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life and Retention

Appendix IV

Comments From the Department of Defense ApenVIxdi
Appendix IV

Comments From the Department of Defense

(713032) Lert Page 49 GAO/NSIAD-99-197BR Quality of Life and Retention
Ordering Information

The first copy of each GAO report and testimony is free.

Additional copies are $2 each. Orders should be sent to the 

following address, accompanied by a check or money order made 

out to the Superintendent of Documents, when necessary, VISA and 

MasterCard credit cards are accepted, also.

Orders for 100 or more copies to be mailed to a single address are 

discounted 25 percent.

Orders by mail:

U.S. General Accounting Office

P.O. Box 37050

Washington, DC 20013

or visit:

Room 1100

700 4th St. NW (corner of 4th and G Sts. NW)

U.S. General Accounting Office

Washington, DC

Orders may also be placed by calling (202) 512-6000

or by using fax number (202) 512-6061, or TDD (202) 512-2537.

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly available reports and 

testimony. To receive facsimile copies of the daily list or any list 

from the past 30 days, please call (202) 512-6000 using a touchtone 

phone. A recorded menu will provide information on how to obtain 

these lists.

For information on how to access GAO reports on the INTERNET, 

send an e-mail message with “info” in the body to:

info@www.gao.gov

or visit GAO’s World Wide Web Home Page at: 

http://www.gao.gov
United States

General Accounting Office

Washington, D.C. 20548-0001

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use $300

Address Correction Requested

Bulk Rate

Postage & Fees Paid

GAO

Permit No. GI00