United States Government Accountability Office

GAO Report to the Chairman, Subcommittee 

on Strategic Forces, Committee on 

Armed Services, House of 

Representatives 

DEFENSE SPACE 

ACTIVITIES 

Management Actions 

Are Needed to Better 

Identify, Track, and 

Train Air Force Space 

Personnel 

September 2006 

 

GAO-06-908 
What GAO Found

United States Government Accountability Office

Why GAO Did This Study

Highlights

Accountability Integrity Reliability

September 2006

DEFENSE SPACE ACTIVITIES 

Management Actions Are Needed to 

Better Identify, Track, and Train Air Force 

Space Personnel 

Highlights of GAO-06-908, a report to the 

Chairman, Subcommittee on Strategic 

Forces, Committee on Armed Services, 

House of Representatives

The Department of Defense (DOD)

relies on space to support a wide 

range of vital military missions. 

Many factors contribute to DOD 

success in space activities, and 

having sufficient quantities of

space-qualified personnel to design,

oversee, and acquire space assets, 

on which DOD expects to spend

about $20 billion in fiscal year 2007, 

is critical to DOD’s ability to carry

out its mission. The individual 

services are responsible for 

providing adequately qualified 

space personnel to meet mission

needs. The Air Force provides over

90 percent of the space personnel

to DOD’s mission, but has not 

identified the space acquisition 

workforce. This report examines 

the extent to which (1) the Air 

Force’s space acquisition 

workforce is managed using a 

strategic workforce management

approach, (2) there are sufficient

numbers of Air Force space 

acquisition personnel to meet

DOD’s national security needs, and 

(3) the Air Force’s space 

acquisition personnel are

adequately qualified for their 

positions. For its analysis, GAO

identified the space acquisition 

workforce as those Air Force 

scientists, engineers, and program 

managers with experience

developing space assets. 

While DOD and the Air Force have not achieved consensus about whether 

the space acquisition workforce should have a designated career field or a 

separate workforce strategy, the Air Force is responsible for strategically 

managing this segment of its workforce as it has for other workforce groups, 

such as pilots and navigators. The Air Force has done needs assessments on 

certain segments of its space workforce, but has not done an integrated, 

zero-based needs assessment of its space acquisition workforce. Such a

strategic assessment would help inform the Air Force’s planned force 

reduction that will result in a decrease of 40,000 active personnel and a 25 

percent reduction of contractor support over 5 years. However, the Air 

Force is not using a zero-based needs assessment that includes the entire 

space acquisition workforce—unclassified and classified programs and 

military, civilian, and contractor personnel—as part of its force reduction 

planning and process improvement efforts. Such an assessment would 

identify if there are skill and competency gaps. As a result, the Air Force may

not be able to manage the impact of its force reductions on the space 

acquisition workforce or take actions to mitigate the impact to ensure this 

workforce meets national security space needs.

In the absence of an integrated, zero-based needs assessment of its space 

acquisition workforce and a career field specialty, the Air Force cannot 

ensure that it has enough space acquisition personnel or personnel who are 

technically proficient to meet national security space needs. The Air Force

has a shortage of midgrade and senior officers who play vital management 

and oversight roles in space acquisition. At the Space and Missile Systems 

Center (SMC), 37 percent of the critical acquisition positions were vacant as 

of April 2006 and about 50 percent of the center’s workload was being done 

by contractors. Also, the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) depends on 

Air Force personnel to fill many of its key space acquisition positions. 

Continuing shortages may hamper SMC’s and NRO’s ability to meet mission 

needs and highlight the Air Force’s need to strategically manage its space 

acquisition workforce. 

 

The technical proficiency of the Air Force’s space acquisition workforce also

may not be adequate to meet national security needs. At SMC, the 

percentage of space acquisition officers with the highest acquisition 

certification level dropped from 28 percent in 1996 to 15 percent in 2005. 

Reasons for the lower certification levels include NRO priority in selecting 

personnel, the lack of a space acquisition specialty, limited training, and the 

decline of personnel coming into the Air Force with technical degrees. 

Although required by law, the Air Force has not developed a career field for 

officers to develop space systems. Without a specialty to identify these 

personnel and increased space acquisition-related education and training,

the Air Force may not be able to strategically manage its workforce and 

ensure personnel can effectively develop space systems. 

www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-06-908.

To view the full product, including the scope 

and methodology, click on the link above. 

For more information, contact Davi M. 

D'Agostino at (202) 512-5431 or 

dagostinod@gao.gov. 

What GAO Recommends

GAO makes recommendations to 

DOD to take actions to better

manage its limited pool of space 

acquisition personnel. DOD 

concurred or partially concurred 

with the recommendations. 
Contents 

Letter 1

Results in Brief 7 

Background 11

Air Force Has Done Some Space and Acquisition Workforce 

Planning, but Lacks an Integrated Zero-Based Needs Assessment 20 

Air Force May Not Have Enough Space Acquisition Personnel to 

Meet National Security Space Needs 23 

Air Force’s Existing Space Acquisition Personnel May Not Be 

Technically Proficient in Ways Needed to Meet National Security 

Space Needs 31 

Conclusions 43

Recommendations for Executive Action 44 

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation 45 

Appendix I Scope and Methodology 49 

Appendix II Comments from the Department of Defense 53 

Appendix III Comments from the National Reconnaissance Office 56 

Appendix IV GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments 60 

Figures 

Figure 1: Overview of DOD Space Acquisition Workforce 5 

Figure 2: Trends in Overall Science and Engineering Degrees 

Awarded to U.S. Citizens and Permanent Residents 13 

Figure 3: Engineering Degrees Awarded to U.S. Citizens and 

Permanent Residents 14 

Figure 4: Composition of the Workforce at SMC 16 

Figure 5: Fiscal Year 2006 Authorized and Assigned Totals for Air 

Force Acquisition Managers by Rank 24 

Figure 6: Fiscal Year 2006 Authorizations for Acquisition Personnel 

by Rank at SMC and for the Air Force Overall 26 

Figure 7: Acquisition Certification Levels at SMC, 1996-2005 32 

Page i GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
Figure 8: Acquisition Certification Levels for Acquisition Officers at 

SMC and the Air Force 34 

Figure 9: Space Professional Certification Levels for SMC Space 

Acquisition Workforce 35 

Figure 10: Acquisition Certification Levels for Classified and SMC 

Space Acquisition Workforces 36 

Figure 11: Space Certification Levels for Classified and SMC Space 

Acquisition Workforces 37 

Abbreviations 

AFSC Air Force Specialty Code

APDP Acquisition Professional Development Program 

CLM Continuous Learning Module 

DAU Defense Acquisition University 

DAWIA Defense Acquisition Workforce Improvement Act

DOD Department of Defense 

FFRDC Federally Funded Research and Development Center 

NRO National Reconnaissance Office 

NSF National Science Foundation 

NSSI National Security Space Institute 

SETA Scientific and Engineering Technical Assistance 

SMC Space and Missile Systems Center 

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-06-908 Defense Space Activities
United States Government Accountability Office

Washington, DC 20548 

September 21, 2006 

The Honorable Terry Everett 

Chairman 

Subcommittee on Strategic Forces 

Committee on Armed Services 

House of Representatives 

Dear Mr. Chairman: 

The Department of Defense (DOD) relies on space to support a wide range 

of vital military missions, including intelligence collection; battlefield 

surveillance and management; global command, control, and 

communications; and navigation assistance. Having sufficient quantities of

space-qualified personnel—the “space cadre”—available to design, 

acquire, and oversee the production of space assets, on which DOD 

expects to spend about $20 billion in fiscal year 2007, is critical to DOD’s 

and the individual warfighter’s ability to carry out their missions. In order 

to ensure that access to space remains reliable and unfettered, DOD has 

stated that it will improve responsive space access; satellite operations; 

and other space-enabling capabilities, such as the space industrial base, 

space science and technology efforts, and space-qualified personnel. 

Congress has long been concerned about DOD’s management and 

organization of space activities, and it chartered a commission in 1999—

known as the Space Commission—to review national security space 

activities. In its January 2001 report, the Space Commission noted that 

DOD needs a total force composed of well-educated, motivated, and 

competent personnel to work on space operations, requirements, and 

acquisition, but that DOD was not yet on course to develop the space 

cadre the nation needs.1

 The commission warned that many experienced

personnel were retiring and that recruitment and retention of spacequalified personnel was a problem. In implementing the commission’s 

recommendations, the Secretary of Defense gave the services the 

responsibility to develop and maintain sufficient quantities of space-

 1

 Department of Defense, Space Commission, Report of the Commission to Assess United

States National Security Space Management and Organization (Washington, D.C.:

Jan. 11, 2001). 

Page 1 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
qualified personnel.2

 To better manage its space systems and acquisition of 

major space programs, DOD issued a directive that established an 

Executive Agent for Space in June 2003 to develop, coordinate, and 

integrate plans and programs for space systems and for the acquisition of 

space major defense acquisition programs.3

 Currently, the Under Secretary 

of the Air Force serves as the DOD Executive Agent for Space. In February 

2004, DOD issued its space human capital strategy that set overall goals 

for developing and integrating space personnel, and that year Congress 

also directed the Secretary of the Air Force to establish and implement 

policies and procedures to develop a career field for Air Force officers 

with technical competence in space-related matters.4

We have previously reported on DOD’s space human capital strategy and

efforts by the military departments to develop their space personnel.5

 In 

our first report, issued in August 2004, we recommended that DOD 

develop an implementation plan for its strategy and that the Army and 

Navy develop strategies and establish focal points for managing their 

space personnel.6

 In response to our recommendations, DOD issued an 

implementation plan for its space human capital strategy, and the Navy

issued a space cadre strategy and established a focal point. The Army has 

not yet implemented our recommendations. In our second report, issued 

in September 2005, we recommended that the Secretary of Defense issue 

agencywide guidance to provide accountability by defining and 

institutionalizing space cadre authorities and the responsibilities of the 

Executive Agent and the services, and that the Secretary of Defense direct

 2

 Secretary of Defense Memorandum, “National Security Space Management and

Organization,” October 18, 2001. 

3

 DOD Directive 5101.2, DOD Executive Agent for Space, June 3, 2003. Executive agent is a

term used to indicate a delegation of authority by the Secretary of Defense to a subordinate

to act on the Secretary’s behalf. According to a DOD directive issued in September 2002, 

the nature and scope of an executive agent’s responsibilities, functions, and authorities 

shall be prescribed at the time of assignment and remain in effect until revoked or 

superseded. See Section 3.1, DOD Directive 5101.1, DOD Executive Agent, September 3,

2002. 

4

 10 U.S.C. § 8084. 

5

 In the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004, Congress required that we 

submit two reports assessing DOD’s space human capital strategy and the efforts by the 

military departments to develop their space personnel. 

6

 GAO, Defense Space Activities: Additional Actions Needed to Implement Human 

Capital Strategy and Develop Space Personnel, GAO-04-697 (Washington, D.C.: Aug. 11, 

2004). 

Page 2 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
the DOD Executive Agent for Space to develop appropriate performance 

measures and evaluation plans for each service.7 As of May 2006, DOD had 

not implemented the recommendations made in our 2005 report. 

Many factors, such as the use of new and unproven technology and 

workforce issues, can contribute to space program delays and cost 

overruns. We have recently reported that DOD’s space acquisition 

programs have experienced cost and schedule overruns that have 

postponed delivery of promised capabilities to the warfighter; in some 

cases, capabilities have not been delivered after decades of development.8

We have identified a number of causes behind these problems, noting that 

among the causes that most consistently stand out are that DOD starts 

more programs than it can afford, starts programs before it has assurance 

of technological maturity, and allows new requirements to be added well 

into the acquisition phase. In addition, we have identified additional 

problems that contribute to space acquisition problems, though less 

directly affecting cost and schedule problems. These include such 

problems as short tenures of top leadership and acquisition managers as 

well as capacity shortfalls, such as shortages in scientists and engineers 

and experts in systems and software engineering to oversee its space 

programs.9

Strategic human capital management is a pervasive challenge facing the 

federal government. In January 2001 and again in January 2003, we 

identified strategic human capital management as a governmentwide highrisk area after finding that the lack of attention to strategic human capital

planning had undermined the federal government’s ability to serve the 

American people effectively.10 In the wake of extensive downsizing 

performed during the early 1990s, largely without sufficient consideration 

of the strategic consequences, agencies are experiencing significant 

challenges to deploying the right skills, in the right places, at the right 

times. With a growing number of employees who are eligible for 

 7

 GAO, Defense Space Activities: Management Guidance and Performance Measures 

Needed to Develop Personnel, GAO-05-833 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 21, 2005). 

8

 GAO, Space Acquisitions: Improvements Needed in Space Systems Acquisitions and 

Keys to Achieving Them, GAO-06-626T (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 6, 2006). 

9 GAO-06-626T. 

10 GAO, High-Risk Series: An Update, GAO-01-263 (Washington, D.C.: January 2001), and 

High-Risk Series: An Update, GAO-03-119 (Washington, D.C.: January 2003). 

Page 3 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
retirement, agencies are also finding it difficult to fill certain missioncritical jobs—a situation that could significantly drain their institutional 

knowledge.

Effectively managing today’s workforce is multifaceted. The strategic 

workforce planning model used by leading public and private 

organizations to effectively manage their workforces includes the 

following five key elements11: involving management, employees, and 

stakeholders; analyzing critical skill and competency gaps between 

current and future workforce needs; developing strategies to fill identified 

gaps; building capabilities to address requirements; and monitoring and 

evaluating progress and the contribution of strategic workforce planning

efforts in achieving goals. We also identified additional aspects of 

effectively managing today’s workforce, including the use of a zero-based

needs assessment to identify resources that are needed to carry out an 

organization’s mission. A zero-based integrated needs assessment “zeroes 

out” an organization’s existing resources and assesses the organization’s 

needs from a bottom-up approach. It often results in a clearer picture of 

the resources that are needed without being encumbered by the need to 

reorganize the organization’s existing resource base. Other important 

aspects of effectively managing a workforce include establishing career 

fields to provide specific management and development of distinct 

workforces, defining critical skill sets, and establishing training 

requirements. 

Personnel who acquire space assets—the space acquisition workforce—

are not defined as a distinct workforce or career field within DOD or the 

Air Force. However, for the purposes of our review, we identified space 

acquisition personnel as those belonging to either of two workforces that 

DOD and the Air Force have defined—the acquisition workforce and the 

space cadre workforce. These two workforces have separate management 

frameworks, and each has certifications, career fields, training, and other 

requirements tailored to its particular needs. Certifications help establish 

and maintain professional standards. Career fields provide a development 

path and identify the training and experience needed for personnel to 

progress through the career field. 

 11 GAO, DOD Civilian Personnel: Comprehensive Strategic Workforce Plans Needed, 

GAO-04-753 (Washington, D.C.: June 30, 2004). 

Page 4 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
Using the Air Force acquisition career field, we identified scientists, 

engineers, and acquisition managers with experience in developing and 

acquiring space assets. We determined that the Air Force accounts for 

more than 90 percent of space personnel, with the remaining 10 percent 

generally consisting of Army and Navy personnel. Additionally, the space 

acquisition workforce includes military personnel, civilians, and 

contractors. Figure 1 depicts our definition of the DOD space acquisition 

workforce. 

Figure 1: Overview of DOD Space Acquisition Workforce 

Since the overwhelming majority of space personnel work for the Air 

Force, we focused our review on that service. Overall, our analysis 

focused on Air Force officers because the Air Force does not yet track

civilians or enlisted personnel to the extent that it does officers. Within the 

Air Force, the space cadre workforce consists of officers in the following 

career fields: space operators, scientists, engineers, and acquisition 

managers. The Air Force’s acquisition workforce consists of officers in the 

following career fields: scientists, engineers, acquisition managers, 

contracting officers, and financial managers. Using these definitions of the 

acquisition and space cadre workforces, we defined the space acquisition 

workforce as comprising scientists, engineers, and acquisition managers 

with experience in developing and acquiring space assets. 

Page 5 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
As of April 2006, approximately 1,850 Air Force space acquisition officers 

and civilians were located at the Space and Missile Systems Center (SMC), 

which is part of the U.S. Air Force Space Command. About 1,300 Air Force 

personnel, including approximately 340 acquisition and contracting 

officers, were located at the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO), which 

designs, builds, and operates the nation’s reconnaissance satellites.12 NRO 

has no permanently assigned personnel; rather, it draws personnel on 

rotational assignments from the services and the intelligence community. 

In response to your request, our objectives for this report were to 

determine the extent to which (1) the Air Force’s space acquisition 

workforce is managed using a strategic workforce planning approach, 

(2) there are sufficient numbers of Air Force space acquisition personnel 

available to meet DOD’s national security space needs, and (3) the Air 

Force’s space acquisition personnel are adequately qualified for their 

positions. In order to achieve these objectives, we first identified the space 

acquisition workforce since, as previously mentioned, neither DOD nor the 

Air Force had established this as a separate workforce. To do this, we 

obtained Air Force data on the acquisition workforce and identified those 

acquisition personnel who had space experience. We also obtained Air 

Force data on the space cadre, and we identified those space cadre 

personnel who had acquisition experience. We obtained specific database 

codes in the space professional database that contains all space cadre 

members, which allowed us to determine education, experience, and 

expertise levels for the space acquisition workforce, and whether the 

personnel were working on classified or unclassified space programs. 

DOD and Air Force officials agreed with our methodology to determine 

the space acquisition workforce, and we found the data we used to make 

this determination to be sufficiently reliable for purposes of this review. 

To determine the extent to which the Air Force’s space acquisition 

workforce is managed using a strategic workforce planning approach, we

identified a strategic workforce planning model used by leading 

organizations.

13 We then interviewed officials and obtained documentation

 12 For NRO, the number of acquisition officers is only an approximation because some who

are coded as acquisition officers could actually be performing non-space acquisition duties;

conversely, some who are not coded as acquisition officers could be performing space 

acquisition duties. The amounts cited represent our best estimate in the absence of more

detailed information from NRO. 

13 See GAO, A Model of Strategic Human Capital Planning, GAO-02-373SP (Washington,

D.C.: Mar. 15, 2002), and National Academy of Public Administration, Building Successful

Organizations: A Guide to Strategic Workforce Planning (Washington, D.C.: May 2000). 

Page 6 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
to find out whether strategies, plans, or both for the space acquisition 

workforce exist, and if so, if they are in accordance with the accepted 

strategic workforce planning model. To determine the extent to which 

there are sufficient numbers of Air Force space acquisition personnel to 

meet DOD’s national security space needs, we interviewed officials, 

obtained documentation, and analyzed Air Force Headquarters data to 

assess overall trends in composition and assignments of the space 

acquisition workforce. To determine the extent to which Air Force space

acquisition personnel are adequately qualified for their positions, we 

interviewed officials, obtained documentation, and analyzed data from the 

Air Force Personnel Center and SMC and space professional databases in

order to assess the certification and education levels of the Air Force’s 

space acquisition workforce. 

Part of our analysis regarding the quantity and quality of the space 

acquisition workforce was limited due to the lack of NRO data. NRO did 

provide us the overall number of Air Force personnel assigned to it, but 

did not provide us information on the education, experience, or expertise 

of NRO personnel. As a result, we could not compare the education, 

experience, or expertise of the space acquisition workforce at SMC and 

NRO, and we could not compare the NRO space acquisition workforce 

directly to the Air Force acquisition workforce. In this regard, we were 

only able to compare SMC personnel directly to Air Force acquisition 

personnel. However, we were able to identify Air Force acquisition 

officers who work on classified space programs and, using them as a 

proxy for the NRO space acquisition workforce, we compared this group 

to Air Force acquisition personnel. Additionally, we noted the actions that 

DOD and the Air Force had taken to manage their workforces using a 

strategic workforce management approach, but we did not evaluate the 

sufficiency of the actions they took.

We conducted our review from October 2005 through June 2006 in 

accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. More 

detailed information on our scope and methodology is provided in 

appendix I. 

While DOD and the Air Force have not achieved consensus about whether 

the space acquisition workforce should have a designated career field or a 

separate workforce strategy, the Air Force is responsible for strategically 

Results in Brief 

Page 7 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
managing this segment of its workforce just as it is for other workforce 

groups, such as pilots and navigators.14 The Air Force has taken actions to 

strategically manage the acquisition workforce and the space cadre 

separately, including defining critical skill sets and designating training for 

the space and acquisition workforces, and it has done needs assessments 

on certain segments of its space workforce. However, the Air Force has 

not done and does not plan to do an integrated, zero-based needs 

assessment of its space acquisition workforce, including military 

personnel, civilians, and contractors for both classified and unclassified 

space programs. Such a strategic needs assessment would help inform the 

Air Force’s planned force reduction, which is projected to result in a 

decrease of 40,000 active duty positions and a 25 percent reduction in 

contractor support over the next 5 years. A zero-based needs assessment 

enables an organization to identify whether skill and competency gaps 

exist between current and future workforces needed to meet program 

goals. It is unclear to what extent needs assessments will be incorporated 

into the Air Force’s force reduction planning process. Without performing 

an integrated and zero-based space acquisition workforce needs 

assessment and using the results to inform its force reduction planning,

the Air Force may not be able to manage the impact of its force reduction

on the space acquisition workforce or take actions to mitigate the impact 

to ensure it has the quantity and quality of space acquisition personnel 

needed to accomplish its space mission. 

In the absence of an integrated, zero-based needs assessment of its space 

acquisition workforce and a career field specialty, the Air Force cannot

ensure that it has enough space acquisition personnel or personnel who 

are technically proficient to meet national security space needs. According 

to the directive establishing the DOD Executive Agent for Space, the 

services are responsible for developing and maintaining sufficient 

numbers of space personnel to support space planning, programming, 

acquisitions, and operations. According to Air Force totals of authorized 

and assigned acquisition personnel, which include space acquisition 

personnel, the Air Force is experiencing a shortage of midgrade and senior

 14 Examples of other workforce groups include personnel in specific career fields, such as

pilots or intelligence personnel, and a designated grouping of several career fields, such as

the space cadre, which comprises personnel from several Air Force career fields. 

Page 8 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
officers15 who perform space acquisition, and contractor support is filling 

these shortages. Midgrade and senior officers provide experience and play

vital management and oversight roles, including as acquisition program 

managers. At SMC, 37 percent of the senior officer positions in engineering 

and program management were vacant as of April 2006, and more than 50 

percent of the center’s workload is being performed by contractors. At 

NRO, this shortage of midgrade and senior officers may ultimately lead to 

increased reliance on contractors, since NRO depends on Air Force 

personnel to fill many of its space acquisition positions. As of March 2006,

we determined that approximately 57 percent of NRO employees were Air 

Force personnel. The shortages in midgrade and senior positions are due, 

in part, to the overall post-Cold War drawdown of military personnel, 

including space acquisition personnel,16 and to the limited opportunities 

available for senior officers in the technical acquisition career fields. The 

Air Force has recognized the existence of these shortages and has begun 

considering ways to address them, such as potentially identifying and

moving acquisition officers who are in nonacquisition positions to space 

acquisition positions. However, the Air Force has not yet addressed the 

shortages because it is trying to balance overall shortages in multiple 

career fields, of which acquisition is not perceived as the most important. 

For example, according to Air Force officials, space acquisition workforce 

shortages have to compete for resources with demands in other career 

fields, such as pilots and navigators. Continuing shortages of these 

personnel may hamper SMC’s and NRO’s ability to meet mission needs and 

highlight the need for the Air Force to strategically manage its space 

acquisition workforce. 

Furthermore, the technical proficiency of space acquisition personnel who 

are available to the Air Force may not be adequate to meet national 

security space needs. Title 10 of the United States Code contains a 

provision to ensure that space personnel are adequately qualified to meet 

 15 We define midgrade officers as those officers who have served 9 to 15 years of an average 

20-year career, which can encompass the ranks of captain and major. We define senior 

officers as those who have served 16 or more years of an average 20-year career, which can 

encompass the ranks of lieutenant colonel and above. 

16 We also wanted to determine if the shortages were caused by engineers being assigned to 

other career fields. However, we found that the Air Force is predominantly using the 

engineers it has to fill general acquisition-related positions. Specifically, we found that from 

1994 to 2005, the Air Force placed approximately 84 percent of its engineers in acquisitionrelated positions. In addition, we note that Title 10 requires that there be a balance between 

the need for military personnel to serve in career broadening positions and the need for 

them to serve in positions for a sufficient length of time. 10 U.S.C. § 1722 (f)(2). 

Page 9 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
mission needs, requiring the Secretary of the Air Force to develop a career 

field for officers with technical competence in space-related matters, 

including the capability to develop space systems.17 At SMC, 61 percent of 

the officers had the lowest space acquisition certification level, and 23 

percent had no certification. In addition, the percentage of SMC officers 

with the highest acquisition certifications has dropped from 28 percent in

1996 to 15 percent in 2005. The levels of space and acquisition certification 

levels can be attributed to several factors. First, for SMC, the lower levels

of acquisition and space certifications may have occurred because NRO 

has received priority in selecting space acquisition personnel with higher 

qualifications, according to DOD and NRO officials. In June 2006, the Air 

Force and NRO agreed to address a number of workforce issues, but it is 

not clear how this will affect staffing between SMC and NRO. Second, the 

Air Force has not institutionalized a means of identifying the space 

acquisition specialty within any of its existing career fields. Doing so could 

provide standardized education and training requirements specific to 

space acquisition for all personnel involved in managing space acquisition 

programs, and it could help to develop personnel with the technical 

expertise to effectively oversee the acquisition of space systems. Third, 

training that focuses on space acquisition is limited. For example, the 

Defense Acquisition University (DAU) does not incorporate space-specific 

training into its required curricula for the acquisition workforce, and the 

Air Force’s National Security Space Institute offers only limited acquisition 

content in its curricula for the space workforce. Without increased space 

and acquisition-related training and a career field or specialty that 

addresses standardized education and training requirements specific to 

space acquisition, the Air Force may lack visibility over the capabilities 

and career paths of its space acquisition personnel, and therefore may not 

have the ability to ensure that space acquisition personnel can effectively 

supervise and oversee the development of new space systems. Lastly, the 

percentage of new acquisition managers coming into the Air Force with 

technical degrees has declined over the past 15 years, from 68 percent in 

1990 to 16 percent in 2005. The decline in acquisition managers with 

technical degrees, coupled with the factors listed above, may undermine 

the Air Force’s ability to strategically manage its space acquisition 

workforce and meet national security space mission needs. 

We are making recommendations to the Air Force to take actions to 

promote better management of its limited pool of space acquisition 

 17 10 U.S.C. § 8084. 

Page 10 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
personnel. In commenting on a draft of this report, DOD concurred or 

partially concurred with these recommendations. NRO provided 

comments but did not formally agree or disagree with our 

recommendations. 

Congress and DOD have become increasingly concerned about significant 

cost increases and program delays for space acquisition programs. 

Moreover, the skilled and technical workforce needed to manage space 

programs may not be sustained at a rate necessary to meet national 

security needs. We have previously reported on space acquisition 

performance and space cadre workforce issues and have made 

recommendations to improve both the acquisition performance of space 

programs and the workforce, over 90 percent of which resides in the Air 

Force. 

Over the past decade, Congress and DOD officials have expressed 

concerns about the performance of acquisition programs, including space 

acquisition programs, since the programs have consistently experienced

significant cost growth and schedule delays. These concerns led to the 

commissioning of numerous studies, many of which highlighted systemic 

issues with the acquisition workforce, including the space acquisition 

workforce, as contributing to program difficulties. Two of the most recent 

studies are reports by the Defense Science Board and the Defense 

Acquisition Performance Assessment Project. 

Background 

Acquisition Workforce 

Management Concerns 

In May 2003, a joint task force of the Defense Science Board issued a 

report on the acquisition of national security space programs, known as 

the Young Panel report.18 The task force had been chartered by senior 

Office of the Secretary of Defense and Air Force officials, including the 

Under Secretary of the Air Force who was also serving as the Director of 

NRO, in order to determine underlying causes and systemic issues related 

to significant problems in many critical national security space programs. 

The members of the task force noted that one systemic issue is that there 

is an overall underappreciation of the importance of appropriately staffed 

and trained system engineering staffs to manage the technologically 

 18 Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, 

Report of the Defense Science Board/Air Force Scientific Advisory Board Joint Task 

Force on Acquisition of National Security Space Programs (Washington, D.C.: May 2003). 

Page 11 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
demanding and unique aspects of space programs. In July 2004, the task 

force followed up on the progress made in implementing the Young Panel

report recommendations. Although the task force noted in this follow-up 

report that the establishment of the space cadre was a very positive step, it 

maintained that the distinctiveness of a space acquisition professional 

should be recognized with a special identifier. 

Additionally, the Defense Acquisition Performance Assessment (DAPA) 

Project completed an integrated acquisition assessment at the request of 

the Deputy Secretary of Defense and issued its report in January 2006.19

Although this report was not limited to space acquisition programs, it 

noted, among other things, that key DOD acquisition personnel, 

particularly acquisition managers, do not have sufficient experience, 

tenure, and training to meet current acquisition challenges and that system

engineering capability within DOD is not sufficient to meet program needs. 

Consequently, the DAPA report recommended that there be an increase in

the number of federal employees focused on critical skill areas, such as 

program management and system engineering, with the cost of this 

increase to be offset by reductions in funding for contractor support. 

Moreover, the report also recommended the establishment of consistent 

training, education, certification, and qualification standards for the entire

acquisition workforce. Finally, the report noted that the aging science and 

engineering workforce and declining numbers of science and engineering 

graduates willing to enter either industry or government will have a 

negative impact on DOD’s ability to address workforce concerns. 

Trends in Science and 

Engineering Degrees 

According to the National Science Foundation (NSF), the numbers of U.S. 

citizens and permanent residents earning science and engineering 

degrees20 at the bachelor’s and doctoral levels remained constant or 

declined during the 1990s. At the bachelor’s level, which is the level at 

which officers normally enter the Air Force, the numbers have increased 

since then in some fields. At the doctoral level, from which the Air Force 

draws technical experts, the U.S. citizen and permanent resident share of

 19 Defense Acquisition Performance Assessment Project, Defense Acquisition Performance 

Assessment, January 2006. 

20 We included degrees in the following categories, which include fields required to enter 

the Air Force as a scientist or engineer: physical sciences, mathematics and computer 

sciences, and engineering. We excluded the social and life sciences from our analysis. 

Page 12 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
the total has continued to decline. Figure 2 shows the trends in degrees by

level. 

Figure 2: Trends in Overall Science and Engineering Degrees Awarded to U.S. Citizens and Permanent Residents 

Note: Bachelor’s and master’s degree data unavailable for 1999. 

Among engineering graduates, the number of doctoral degrees has 

declined steadily over the past decade, and the number of bachelor’s and 

master’s degrees declined in the mid-1990s but has grown since 2002. 

Figure 3 shows the trends in engineering degrees awarded to U.S. citizens 

and permanent residents since 1989.

Page 13 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
Figure 3: Engineering Degrees Awarded to U.S. Citizens and Permanent Residents 

Note: Bachelor’s and master’s degree data unavailable for 1999. 

The number of engineering graduates, as depicted in figure 3, represents 

the maximum pool from which Air Force engineering officers, civilians, 

and contractors may be drawn. However, permanent residents will not 

necessarily all go on to obtain citizenship, and not even all citizens will be 

able to obtain the security clearances that some space-related positions 

require. In addition, demand throughout DOD is high, according to DOD 

officials: the department employs about 45 percent of the federal 

government’s approximately 200,000 scientists and engineers, including 

about two-thirds of its engineers. Therefore, DOD considers the 

dependability of the supply of scientists and engineers who are able to 

obtain security clearances to be in question. 

Air Force Role in Space 

Acquisition 

The Air Force is DOD’s primary procurer and operator of space systems 

that are used by the services and others throughout DOD. These activities 

primarily occur at SMC or NRO. SMC, a subordinate command of Air 

Force Space Command, designs and acquires all Air Force and most DOD 

Page 14 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
space systems. As of February 2006, SMC had an authorized workforce of 

about 7,000 people, who are divided among eight system program offices, 

such as the Space Superiority and the Global Positioning System Program 

Office, and several technical, financial, and logistical support directorates.

SMC’s space acquisition workforce is composed of Air Force officers and 

civilians, federally funded research and development center (FFRDC) 

personnel, and other contractors, each of whom plays a specific role in the 

acquisition process. Officers provide overall management and military 

perspective on user needs; civilians provide continuity, functional 

expertise, and institutional knowledge; FFRDC personnel provide in-depth 

knowledge of programs and an independent perspective; and contractors 

provide systems engineering and technical assistance (SETA) as a surge 

capability to meet a variety of skills shortages. In addition, enlisted 

personnel fill varied support roles. Figure 4 shows the composition of the 

SMC workforce. The shaded portion represents contractors, who 

constitute slightly more than half of the SMC acquisition workforce. 

Page 15 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
Figure 4: Composition of the Workforce at SMC 

Notes: Acquisition officers are the scientists, engineers, and acquisition managers that we have 

defined as constituting the space acquisition workforce. In addition, we included contracting and 

financial management officers, whom SMC considers part of its acquisition workforce and who are 

part of the broad Air Force acquisition career field. 

NRO, which designs and acquires reconnaissance satellites, is a defense 

agency whose director reports jointly to the Director for National 

Intelligence and the Secretary of Defense. From 2001 to 2005, the Under 

Secretary of the Air Force also served concurrently as the Director of 

NRO.21 Similar to SMC’s space acquisition workforce, the space acquisition 

workforce at NRO also includes Air Force officers, enlisted personnel, and 

civilians. In addition, Central Intelligence Agency employees, personnel 

from the other military services, and contractors contribute personnel to 

NRO. Although exact figures were not available, NRO is authorized 

approximately 40 percent as many officers with acquisition specialties as 

 21 In 2001, the positions of the Under Secretary of the Air Force and the Director of NRO 

were merged, upon the recommendation of the Space Commission. However, in July 2005,

the Secretary of Defense split the positions once again, appointing a person to serve 

exclusively as the Director of NRO. 

Page 16 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
is SMC.22 Historically, the NRO space acquisition workforce has received 

substantial support from both FFRDC personnel and private contractors. 

Space Acquisition 

Workforce Is Not Defined 

as a Distinct Workforce 

DOD and the Air Force have not established a separate workforce for 

space acquisition personnel.23 As a result, we determined that the space 

acquisition workforce resides in two areas—the acquisition workforce or 

the space cadre workforce. In other words, we determined that the space 

acquisition workforce consists of acquisition personnel with space 

experience and space cadre personnel with acquisition experience. The 

Air Force acquisition workforce and the space cadre workforce have 

separate management frameworks—each of which has a separate 

workforce strategy—that include different certification levels tailored to 

each of the workforces’ needs. 

The Air Force has not developed a separate workforce strategy for space 

acquisition personnel because there is no consensus within DOD or the 

services that space systems are inherently different from other systems, 

and DOD’s current position is that those involved in developing or 

acquiring space assets are not different enough from other acquirers to 

warrant a separate workforce strategy. The departmentwide Space 

Professional Oversight Board has debated this issue, and we found 

officials who agreed with both positions. Officials cite two principal 

arguments in favor of the view that space is unique. First, according to 

some Air Force and DOD officials, as well as a DAU briefing to the Air 

Force’s National Security Space Institute’s (NSSI) flag-officer level 

executive course, space acquisition is different because space systems are 

purchased in small quantities; there are few operators, and these require 

specialized training; and these systems need to be perfect the first time, 

because satellites cannot be recalled for repairs. In addition, a high 

proportion of total costs are devoted to system acquisition rather than 

operations and support, which is different from the typical DOD life cycle 

 22 For NRO, the authorized percentage of acquisition officers is only an approximation 

because some who are coded as acquisition officers could actually be performing nonspace acquisition duties; conversely, some who are not coded as acquisition officers could 

be performing space acquisition duties. The authorized percentage cited represents our 

best estimate in the absence of more detailed information from NRO.

23 The Navy and the Army also have space officers who perform acquisition work, but Army

and Navy space programs are relatively small as a percentage of the overall DOD space

program. 

Page 17 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
cost curve. Second, some senior Air Force and DOD officials believe that 

personnel need to spend at least a decade learning about space systems 

before they can become effective acquirers and that knowledge of systems 

engineering is critical for space acquisition work. 

Officials who do not view space as inherently different cite two principal 

arguments. First, each type of procurement has unique aspects—for 

example, lives may be lost when prototype aircraft crash—and therefore 

making a distinction between space and non-space acquisition would set a 

precedent that could lead to demands for numerous separate acquisition 

strategies. In addition, officials pointed out that Defense Acquisition 

Workforce Improvement Act (DAWIA) requirements are structured 

functionally. Personnel specialize in such areas as program management 

or systems planning, research, development, and engineering, not in major 

systems like satellites or aircraft. Therefore, an acquisition manager can 

acquire any type of platform. 

In the absence of a defined space acquisition workforce, we identified the

acquisition workforce and the space cadre and the frameworks used to 

manage them. The acquisition workforce has the Acquisition Professional 

Development Program (APDP), which was established to promote the 

development and sustainment of a professional acquisition workforce 

within the Air Force in accordance with DAWIA requirements.24 The APDP 

consists of three levels of certification for the acquisition professional. 

Acquisition professionals may obtain certification in one or more of 

several areas, such as acquisition program management, systems 

engineering, and test and evaluation. Each level of acquisition certification 

requires a combination of education, experience, and training. For 

example, in order to achieve the first level of certification in the area of 

acquisition program management, an officer must have 1 year of 

acquisition experience and attend an acquisition management course 

offered by DAU.25 To achieve the second level in this area, the officer must 

 24 In 1990, Congress passed DAWIA in order to enhance the quality and professionalism of 

the defense acquisition workforce (Pub. L. No. 101-510). Most of DAWIA was codified in

Title 10 of the United States Code, and it has been amended a few times since enactment.

DAWIA specifies the minimum qualification standards of those personnel performing

functions integral to the acquisition process, formalizes career paths for personnel who

wish to pursue careers in acquisition, and defines critical or senior management acquisition 

positions. 

25 DAU was established in 1992, in accordance with DAWIA, in order to provide for the

professional education, development, and training of the acquisition workforce. 

Page 18 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
have 2 years of acquisition experience and have taken additional DAU 

program management courses. To achieve the third level, the officer 

should have taken some amount of coursework toward a master’s degree,

have 4 years of acquisition experience, and take an additional DAU 

program management course. 

For the space cadre workforce, Air Force acquisition officers with space 

experience are included in Air Force Space Command’s space professional 

development program as credentialed space professionals, also known as 

space cadre members. The Space Professional Development Program 

includes among its basic elements the identification of the unique space 

experiences of space professionals, the tracking of these experiences in a

space professional database, and the establishment of a Space

Professional Certification Program to recognize distinct levels of space 

expertise. The Space Professional Certification Program consists of three 

levels of certification, each of which involves varying levels of education,

training, and experience, and emphasizes substantial space experience as 

the main ingredient qualifying an individual for higher levels of

responsibility. For example, in order to achieve the first level of 

certification, an officer must possess a bachelor’s degree, have taken the

Space 100 course,26 and have at least 1 year of space experience. In order 

to achieve the second level of certification, which is usually around the 10-

year career point, an officer must additionally have taken the Space 200 

course and possess at least 6 years of space experience. Finally, in order 

to achieve the third and highest level of certification, which usually takes 

place around the 15-year career point, an officer must have also taken the 

Space 300 course and have at least 9 years of space experience. Within the 

Air Force’s acquisition workforce, officers in both the scientist and 

engineer career fields are required to possess a degree in a technical area 

that is relevant to their career field. However, acquisition managers are not 

required to hold a technical degree or a master’s degree. 

 26 The courses known as Space 200 and Space 300 are offered by Air Force Space 

Command’s National Security Space Institute, which was established in order to institute 

stronger, technically oriented space education and training programs. Space 100 is offered

by the Air Education and Training Command.

Page 19 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
Although the Air Force has taken some actions to address the key 

elements of strategic workforce management used by leading 

organizations, these actions have been targeted to either the acquisition 

workforce or the space cadre—not the space acquisition workforce. More 

important, the Air Force has not done a zero-based needs assessment for 

the space acquisition workforce—a critical step in strategically managing

a workforce. 

We found that the Air Force has taken several actions to better manage the 

acquisition and the space cadre workforces, such as identifying personnel 

gaps and addressing career path and training development. For example, 

the Air Force Assistant Secretary for Acquisition recently conducted a

long-range review of scientific and engineering capacity within the Air 

Force, and one of acquisition officer/civilian supply and shortages. The Air 

Force Manpower Agency is currently conducting a servicewide 

Acquisition and Sustainment Unit manpower study, and the Office of the 

Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition has entered into an 

agreement with the Office of Personnel Management to conduct a 

workforce and succession planning study, which includes Air Force 

civilian personnel with acquisition specialties. 

The strategic workforce model also entails developing plans and strategies

to fill identified personnel gaps, building capabilities, and monitoring and 

evaluating the progress of efforts. We found that Air Force Headquarters 

has identified gaps in its acquisition workforce and subsequently plans to

allocate acquisition officers among areas of need; however, the plan does 

not distinguish between space-related and other acquisition officers. 

Building capabilities entails acquiring and using flexibilities to shape the 

workforce. We found that the Office of the Air Force Assistant Secretary 

for Acquisition regularly monitors the rates at which authorized positions 

are filled, and brings acquisition personnel shortages to the attention of 

higher headquarters for corrective action. 

The Air Force Space Command has addressed critical skill sets, training, 

and career path development as part of its effort to develop and manage 

its space cadre officers, including acquisition personnel who meet space 

cadre qualifications. For example, Air Force Space Command is 

Air Force Has Done 

Some Space and 

Acquisition Workforce 

Planning, but Lacks 

an Integrated ZeroBased Needs 

Assessment 

Air Force Actions to 

Address the Strategic 

Planning Model Are 

Directed at the Acquisition 

and Space Cadre 

Workforces 

Efforts regarding Skill 

Sets, Training, and Career 

Path Development 

Page 20 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
continuing to conduct an analysis of the current space cadre and to 

identify critical skill sets needed for each segment, including officers, 

enlisted personnel, and civilians. So far, the analysis has been completed 

for acquisition officers, including those who are assigned to NRO, but has 

not yet been completed for civilians. 

Air Force Space Command has also established a space-specific series of 

training courses.27 In addition, SMC and NRO offer space acquisitionspecific curricula to newly assigned officers and civilians at those 

locations. Air Force Space Command has also published its Career 

Opportunities Guide that lists each space-related position, and describes 

the education, experience, and training prerequisites for each to enable

officers to prepare for specific assignments. 

Air Force Space Command and the Air Force’s acquisition career field 

manager have developed sample career paths for space cadre members 

and acquisition officers, respectively, to follow. Each sample career path 

provides variations that provide flexibility and emphasize different types 

of assignments, depending on individual preference and service needs. 

Efforts regarding 

Recruitment and 

Promotion 

In terms of recruitment and promotion, the Air Force Deputy Chief of Staff 

for Personnel annually sets recruitment targets as well as retention and 

promotion goals for each military rank with input from each of the career 

field managers. The major commands, such as Air Force Space Command, 

do not set recruitment targets. Rather, acquisition officers are recruited 

and promoted according to targets set for each career field and source of

commission. Individuals who may fill space acquisition positions at some 

time in their careers are normally recruited into space operations or one of

the acquisition career fields, but officers from a wider range of career 

fields, including pilots, may also fill acquisition positions. Civilian 

recruitment is managed at the major command level. Air Force Space

Command, and subordinate commands such as SMC, may hire civilian 

personnel up to the command’s budget ceiling. Different major commands 

can therefore tailor the civilian proportion of the workforce to their 

particular needs. 

 27 The series consists of three courses, which are designed to be completed in

approximately the 1st, 9th, and 15th year of service, respectively. The latter two courses 

are managed by NSSI, and are meant eventually to be given to all space cadre members at

the appropriate point in their careers.

Page 21 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
The Air Force has not performed an integrated zero-based needs 

assessment for the entire space acquisition workforce. It has performed or 

will perform such assessments for components of the space acquisition 

workforce. For example, the Air Force has done an assessment of the 

personnel working on classified space systems that recommended a 27 

percent reduction in positions allotted to NRO. In addition, at the time of 

our review, the Air Force was conducting an assessment that included 

personnel working on unclassified systems; however, the Air Force has 

not conducted an integrated needs assessment of its entire space 

acquisition workforce, to include all segments of the workforce—military, 

civilian and contractor personnel—and those who work on both classified 

and unclassified space systems. In May 2005, the Air Force completed a 

separate zero-based needs assessment that included those Air Force 

personnel who were assigned to classified programs. This assessment 

included all Air Force personnel who are assigned to classified positions, 

not only those space acquisition personnel working on classified space 

systems. According to Air Force officials, the purpose of the ongoing 

assessment of personnel working on unclassified space systems is to 

establish an approved method of distributing all acquisition personnel, 

including space acquisition personnel, among the various acquisition 

organizations in order to ensure that each organization has the right 

number of personnel with the right skill sets to meet its mission goals. 

Although Air Force officials told us that this assessment includes military, 

civilian, and contractor personnel, they noted that it does not include the 

portion of the space acquisition workforce that works on classified space 

systems. 

The Air Force Does Not 

Have an Integrated ZeroBased Needs Assessment 

for the Space Acquisition 

Workforce 

The Air Force is entering a 5-year period that will see a projected decrease 

of 40,000 active duty positions and a 25 percent reduction in both the 

SETA and the FFRDC contractor workforces. It is unclear to what extent 

the two completed and ongoing needs assessments will be incorporated 

into the service’s force reduction planning and process improvement 

efforts. Also, the Air Force cannot draw on overall DOD guidance: the 

recently published acquisition workforce strategic plan lacked information 

on the space workforce. The absence of such a fact-based gap analysis can

undermine an organization’s efforts to identify and respond to current and

emerging challenges. For example, without such an analysis, the Air Force 

may find itself with a workforce that does not have the education, 

experience, or expertise needed when program goals change. Additionally, 

without incorporating an integrated space acquisition workforce needs 

assessment into its force reduction planning, or reducing the number of 

space acquisition programs, the Air Force may find it difficult to determine 

Page 22 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
the impact of its force reductions on the quantity and quality of its space 

acquisition personnel and to formulate actions to mitigate the reductions. 

In the absence of an integrated, zero-based needs assessment of its space 

acquisition workforce, the Air Force cannot ensure that it has enough 

space acquisition personnel to meet national security space needs given its 

current number of space acquisition programs. The Air Force is 

experiencing a shortage of midgrade and senior officers—specifically, 

captains, majors, and lieutenant colonels—who perform space acquisition 

work, and contractor support is filling this shortage. The Air Force has 

recognized the existence of this shortage and has begun considering ways 

to address it, but it has not yet addressed it. 

Determining sufficient numbers of qualified personnel for current and 

future needs is a key function of workforce planning. The DOD directive 

that established the Executive Agent for Space charges the military 

services with developing and maintaining a sufficient number of spacequalified personnel to support space planning, programming, acquisitions,

and operations. The Air Force is experiencing a shortage of mid- and 

senior-grade officers in the engineering and acquisition manager career 

fields, according to Air Force totals of authorized and assigned acquisition 

personnel, which include space acquisition personnel.28 The shortages of 

these officers within the space acquisition workforce may hamper the Air 

Force’s ability to meet national security space needs. Specifically, the

engineering career field is experiencing a shortage from captain to colonel,

and the acquisition manager career field is experiencing a shortage from 

major to colonel. For example, in fiscal year 2006, the Air Force authorized 

that 48 percent of its officers, or 1,285 total, in the engineering workforce 

should be the rank of captain, but currently only 29 percent, or 767, are 

captains. Additionally, while 21 percent should be the rank of major, only 

15 percent are currently majors. Similarly, the Air Force has authorized 28

percent of acquisition managers (713 total) to be majors and 25 percent 

(639 total) to be lieutenant colonels, but these ranks are currently 18

percent (472) of the total and 20 percent (511 total), respectively. Despite 

this shortage, the Air Force currently has more scientists and acquisition 

Air Force May Not 

Have Enough Space 

Acquisition Personnel 

to Meet National 

Security Space Needs 

Air Force May Not Have 

Sufficient Numbers of Midand Senior-Grade Space 

Acquisition Personnel 

 28 Authorization refers to the number of positions that the Air Force has determined it will 

fund in a given fiscal year. Assignment refers to the number of personnel that the Air Force

has placed in those funded positions. 

Page 23 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
managers assigned than authorized. This is because there is a surplus of 

junior officers in these acquisition career fields. For example, in fiscal year 

2006, the Air Force authorized 20 percent of engineers, or 535 total, to be

the rank of lieutenant, but currently 46 percent of engineers, or 1,205 total, 

are lieutenants. Similarly, the Air Force authorized 10 percent of 

acquisition managers, or 254 total, to be the rank of lieutenant, but 

currently 26 percent of acquisition managers, or 686 total, are lieutenants. 

Acquisition managers play an important role in managing space programs, 

and the surplus of lieutenants, or junior officers, as acquisition managers 

may hamper the Air Force’s ability to meet program needs. For an 

example, see figure 5, which shows the authorized and assigned totals by 

rank for the acquisition manager career field. In addition, Air Force 

officials told us that there are other career fields within the service that 

are also experiencing shortages. 

Figure 5: Fiscal Year 2006 Authorized and Assigned Totals for Air Force Acquisition

Managers by Rank

Page 24 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
Based on our analysis, there are similar shortages of majors and lieutenant 

colonels at SMC. As of February 2006, SMC’s authorized positions for 

majors and lieutenant colonels were both filled at 63 percent, which is 

equivalent to 111 majors and 68 lieutenant colonels. In contrast, SMC’s 

positions for lieutenants were filled at 302 percent of their authorized 

numbers; although 116 lieutenants were authorized, there were 350 

lieutenants assigned to SMC. Several officials from the Office of the 

Secretary of the Air Force and SMC told us that SMC is staffed with much 

higher percentages of such junior officers than of midgrade and senior 

officers as part of Air Force’s attempt to address SMC shortages. 

Additionally, 37 percent of SMC’s senior management acquisition positions 

for military personnel performing systems engineering or program 

management functions—positions requiring a rank of lieutenant colonel or 

higher—were vacant as of February 2006. SMC officials have consistently 

expressed concern that the shortage of acquisition personnel with the 

right experience and knowledge—such as those eligible to fill senior 

management acquisition positions—will make it difficult to properly 

manage space system acquisition programs. 

We also observed that, without considering actual fill rates, SMC was 

authorized to receive a greater percentage of junior officers in the 

acquisition career fields than were authorized for the balance of the Air 

Force in fiscal year 2006. For example, in the acquisition manager career 

field, SMC was authorized to have about 14 percent lieutenants and 38 

percent captains, whereas the comparable acquisition manager 

authorizations for the balance of the Air Force were 9 percent lieutenants

and 29 percent captains. Correspondingly, SMC was authorized to receive 

a lower percentage of senior officers than was the rest of the Air Force, 

with SMC authorized to have 7 percent of its engineers be at the rank of 

lieutenant colonel, compared to the Air Force authorization that 10 

percent of engineers be at this rank. In the scientist career field, SMC is 

authorized zero lieutenant colonels and zero colonels, with the remaining 

Air Force authorization being 93 lieutenant colonels and 20 colonels. In 

the engineer career field, SMC is authorized to have 23 lieutenant colonels 

and 5 colonels, with the remaining Air Force authorization being 230 

lieutenant colonels and 33 colonels. Having a lower number of senior 

officers authorized for SMC may create a risk of hampering SMC’s ability 

to carry out its mission, especially compared to locations that are 

receiving a higher rate of senior officers. According to a former 

Commander of Air Force Space Command, the continuing shortage of 

experienced space acquisition personnel assigned to SMC is one of the 

command’s most urgent problems. See figure 6 for more detail on the 

Page 25 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
authorizations by rank for acquisition personnel at SMC and within the Air 

Force as a whole. 

Figure 6: Fiscal Year 2006 Authorizations for Acquisition Personnel by Rank at SMC 

and for the Air Force Overall 

SMC is using contractor support to fill the shortages of midgrade and 

senior officers in the engineering and acquisition manager career fields. 

This contractor support includes both personnel from FFRDCs as well as 

contractors from private companies who provide SETA support. As of 

April 2006, contractors were performing approximately 50 percent of 

SMC’s workload. In addition, SMC employs about 1,300 civilians, about 

half of whom work in technical and financial acquisition positions. Civilian 

Page 26 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
acquisition positions in program offices were filled at a rate of 96 percent 

as of April 2006. According to SMC officials, civilians provide functional 

expertise and continuity, and SMC is pursuing initiatives to increase its 

civilian positions in order to counter the shortage of military space 

acquisition personnel. However, SMC was experiencing a 26 percent 

vacancy rate in its civilian acquisition positions for systems engineering 

and program management as of April 2006, and SMC officials related that

approximately 40 percent of its civilian workforce will be eligible for 

retirement by 2007. We were not able to make a comparison to NRO 

because of lack of information from NRO. However, NRO depends on Air 

Force personnel to fill many of its space acquisition positions, with 

approximately 57 percent of NRO employees being Air Force personnel as 

of March 2006. The shortage of midgrade and senior officers in the Air 

Force may ultimately lead NRO to increase its contractor support. In 

general, the vacancy rates at SMC for both senior military and civilian 

management acquisition positions and the high percentage of the civilian 

workforce that is eligible for retirement in a few years are factors that may 

affect SMC’s ability to carry out its mission. 

The Air Force has recognized the existence of this shortage and has 

recently begun considering potential ways to address it. For example, 

during a March 2006 conference, Air Force officials discussed potential 

near-term solutions to acquisition personnel shortages, such as tapping 

available resources to the maximum extent practicable to fill acquisition 

positions. This near-term solution would involve utilizing acquisition 

officers who currently serve in nonacquisition positions, such as instructor 

positions, as well as officers with nonacquisition specialties, particularly if

they have technical degrees or space experience. Air Force officials also 

discussed mid- and longer-term solutions, such as reevaluating the 

nonrated prioritization plan for acquisition personnel, streamlining the 

civilian hiring process, and defining future acquisition manpower 

requirements. It is unclear what actions will stem from these discussions. 

If actions are not taken to address the shortage of midgrade and senior 

acquisition officers, the Air Force may be facing substantial risk, as the 

shortage may affect the Air Force’s ability to strategically manage its 

workforce to ensure that national security space needs are met. 

Shortages Are Due to 

1990s Reductions in 

Acquisition Personnel and 

Other Factors 

There are several reasons for the Air Force’s shortage of midgrade and 

senior officers in the engineering and acquisition manager career fields. 

First, the shortage is due, in part, to the drawdown of acquisition 

personnel in the 1990s and the effects of DOD’s subsequent acquisition 

reform. Following the end of the Cold War, there was a decline in the 

Page 27 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
national security space budget and a corresponding decrease in the 

number of acquisition personnel available to perform space acquisition 

work. For example, DOD reduced the size of its acquisition workforce in 

the 1990s, beginning in fiscal year 1996 when Congress directed the 

services to reduce the workforce by 15,000 within a year and by 25 percent 

over the following 5 years. This decrease in acquisition personnel means 

that today there are fewer officers, particularly majors and lieutenant 

colonels, to perform acquisition work. This is consistent with the Air 

Force’s workforce model, which shows that it takes an average of 11 and

16 years, respectively, to reach the ranks of major and lieutenant colonel.

The decrease in midgrade and senior space acquisition officers is also 

consistent with the emphasis on breadth in the acquisition career field. 

Scientists and engineers have three defined career paths: technical expert,

manager/leader, and senior leader. Those who embark on the technical 

expert path, and continue to pursue technical depth beyond the senior 

captain level, can generally expect to retire as majors or lieutenant 

colonels. The acquisition manager timeline also concentrates system 

program office assignments early in a career and emphasizes staff 

assignments for majors and lieutenant colonels. By contrast, the space 

professional career guide emphasizes depth of experience; therefore, an 

acquisition officer who is also a member of the space cadre may 

experience difficulty in balancing both sets of expectations.

The 1990s drawdown of the acquisition workforce, including the space 

acquisition workforce, had the effect of increasing DOD’s reliance on

contractor support to perform space acquisition work. We have previously

reported that in the 1990s, DOD structured contracts for acquisition 

programs, including space acquisition programs, in a way that reduced 

oversight and shifted key decision-making responsibility onto 

contractors.29 For example, in 1994, the Secretary of Defense directed that 

acquisition programs, including space acquisition programs, decrease 

reliance on military specifications and standards and encouraged 

contractors to propose nongovernment standards and industrywide 

standards instead. DOD officials told us that the workforce reductions of

the 1990s, coupled with this decision to grant substantial control over 

specifications and standards to contractors, led to poor management of 

acquisition programs, including space acquisition programs, especially 

 29 GAO, Space Acquisitions: Improvements Needed in Space Systems Acquisitions and 

Keys to Achieving Them, GAO-06-626T (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 6, 2006). 

Page 28 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
with regard to testing, process, quality control, and subcontractor 

oversight. As a result, these officials believe that current space acquisition 

programs have many undetected problems that could lead to cost, 

performance, and schedule problems upon discovery. 

In addition, there have been consolidations within the defense supplier 

base for space programs. Since 1985, there were at least 10 fully 

competent prime contractors competing for the large programs and a 

number that could compete for subcontracts. Arguably today, there are 

only two contractors that could handle DOD’s most complex space 

programs. We observed that SMC’s Technical Acquisition Support Services 

contractor firms include the major satellite-building prime contractor 

firms, as well as some firms that are owned by or have other relationships 

with these prime contractors. This interrelationship has caused both the 

House Committee on Armed Services30 and space acquisition organization

leaders to express concern about the potential for conflict of interest and 

the outsourcing of inherently governmental functions. SMC officials 

observed that they lack visibility over the work of subcontractors, which 

can lead to technical problems that cause cost overruns or schedule 

delays. While SMC has calculated that contractors carry out approximately 

50 percent of the organization’s workload, NRO does not have a standard 

method to count its contractors. The DOD Inspector General recently 

reported that although DOD is not required to report the number of 

contractors, omitting contractors from the workforce count results in the 

invisibility of a large part of the true acquisition workforce.31 This lack of 

visibility, over what could be a substantial percentage of the workforce, 

also makes it difficult to determine workforce gaps in critical skills and to 

take corrective actions. 

Another reason for the shortage of midgrade and senior officers in the 

engineering and acquisition manager career fields that constitute the space 

acquisition workforce is that the Air Force is trying to balance overall

shortages in multiple career fields, not only in the acquisition career fields. 

Although it has recognized the existence of this shortage, the Air Force 

considers the needs of all career fields with respect to mission, people,

and available resources when directing personnel actions. However, the 

acquisition career fields are not perceived as the most important of the 

 30 H.R. Rep. No. 109-452, at 350 (2006). 

31 Department of Defense, Office of the Inspector General, Human Capital: Report on the 

DOD Acquisition Workforce Count, D-2006-073 (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 17, 2006). 

Page 29 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
career fields within the Air Force, which generally places greater emphasis 

on recruiting and retaining personnel in the pilot career field. Thus, space 

acquisition workforce shortages have to compete for resources with 

demands for pilots and navigators. According to Air Force personnel data, 

pilots entering the Air Force in fiscal year 2007 will increase as a 

percentage of total Air Force personnel over the course of the next 30 

years whereas engineers decrease as a percentage over the same time 

period. For example, pilots entering the Air Force in fiscal year 2007 will 

make up 19 percent of total Air Force officers, with these pilots at the end 

of this period constituting about 27 percent of total Air Force officers. 

However, engineers will enter the Air Force in fiscal year 2007 constituting

7 percent of total Air Force officers and, in 30 years, they will constitute 

only 2 percent. The lack of emphasis on the acquisition career path and 

the small percentage of Air Force engineers may affect the Air Force’s 

ability to strategically manage its workforce and ensure adequate staffing 

of its program offices. 

Finally, the Air Force has not addressed the shortage of midgrade and 

senior space acquisition officers because it is currently concentrating on 

Air Force overall force reduction planning and process improvement 

efforts. The Air Force is entering a 5-year period that will see a projected

decrease of 40,000 active duty positions and a 25 percent reduction in both 

the SETA and the FFRDC contractor workforces. In the face of these 

reductions, the Air Force has also begun an effort that focuses on the 

identification and elimination of activities, actions, and policies that do not 

contribute to its efficient and effective operation. At the time of our 

review, Air Force officials told us they did not know what impact these 

force reduction and process improvement efforts would have on the Air 

Force space acquisition workforce. 

Page 30 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
The technical proficiency of the current space acquisition workforce that 

is available to the Air Force may not be adequate to meet national security

space needs. Although Title 10 of the United States Code requires the Air 

Force to develop a career field for officers with technical competence in

space-related matters, including the capability to develop space systems,32

there are no specific technical requirements for the space acquisition 

workforce. However, there are certification programs for the acquisition 

and space cadre workforces, the two workforces we have identified as 

including members of the space acquisition workforce. These certification 

programs are the APDP and the Space Professional Certification Program. 

Based on our analysis, the space acquisition workforce at SMC had fewer 

of the higher certification levels in both certification programs. Because of 

the unavailability of NRO data, we were generally only able to examine the 

certification levels for SMC staff. For example, SMC’s percentage of 

personnel with the highest level of acquisition professional certification 

has steadily dropped in the last few years while those at the lowest level of 

certification have steadily increased. Several factors contribute to these 

differences. 

Our analysis showed that SMC acquisition officers have fewer acquisition

certifications at the higher levels than do Air Force acquisition officers 

overall. The Air Force APDP requires a combination of education, 

coursework, and experience to attain any of three levels of certification, 

with the first level being for junior acquisition personnel; the second level 

for midgrade acquisition personnel; and the third level for senior 

acquisition personnel, such as lieutenant colonels and above.

Air Force’s Existing 

Space Acquisition 

Personnel May Not Be 

Technically Proficient 

in Ways Needed to 

Meet National 

Security Space Needs 

SMC Acquisition Officers 

Have Fewer Higher 

Certification Levels 

For SMC only, while the percentage of APDP level 1 personnel is higher in

2005 than in 1996, the percentage of APDP level 3 personnel—the highest 

certification level—has gone down, as shown in figure 7.33

 32 10 U.S.C. § 8084. 

33 Percentages were determined by dividing the total for each level by the overall total for 

that year. 

Page 31 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
Figure 7: Acquisition Certification Levels at SMC, 1996-2005 

Certification at the third level is required for officers to serve in senior 

management acquisition positions, which are acquisition positions 

designated by the Secretary of Defense that carry significant 

responsibility. Specifically, the number of acquisition officers at SMC 

certified at the highest level was about 28 percent in 1996 and in 2005 was 

15 percent. As previously mentioned, approximately 37 percent of SMC’s 

senior management acquisition positions for military personnel 

performing systems engineering or program management functions were 

vacant as of April 2006. One reason for the drop in highly certified 

acquisition officers may be the Air Force’s lack of emphasis on the 

acquisition career path. For example, officials from the Office of the 

Secretary of the Air Force and SMC told us that scientists and engineers 

may choose to leave the Air Force before reaching higher certification 

levels because of the lack of promotion opportunities and the lure of 

higher wages in the private sector, a view which was echoed in a 

discussion we held with about a dozen SMC junior officers. Moreover, 

according to an official from the Office of the Secretary of the Air Force, 

Page 32 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
the drop in the number of highly certified acquisition officers may also be 

explained by a change in Air Force philosophy about promotions, in which 

information regarding an individual’s advanced degree was masked from 

promotion boards in favor of a focus on the individual’s operational or 

warfighting experience. Acquisition personnel, who generally do not 

deploy and are therefore less likely to have operational or warfighting 

experience, may have seen this change concerning promotions as career 

limiting and left the Air Force. The Secretary of the Air Force recently

decided that beginning with calendar year 2008 promotion boards, 

information on all degrees earned by an individual will once again be made 

available to the board. The steadily rising percentage of certification level 

1 personnel since 2001 may be explained by the large number of junior 

officers at SMC but may bode well for future higher certification levels 

over the next decade and beyond. However, the continued lack of 

promotion opportunities for those in the acquisition workforce, including

those in the space acquisition workforce, may not allow the Air Force to 

build on the rising certification levels in the future. 

Acquisition officers at SMC generally had fewer of the acquisition 

certifications at the higher levels compared to acquisition officers for the 

Air Force as a whole. Figure 8 shows these comparisons. 

Page 33 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
Figure 8: Acquisition Certification Levels for Acquisition Officers at SMC and the 

Air Force 

Note: Numbers for each group may add up to more than 100 percent because acquisition officers can 

have certification levels in more than one acquisition category. 

For the space certification levels at SMC, we found that in spring 2006, 61 

percent of the workforce had certification for level 1 of the space 

professional certification program—the lowest level of the program—and 

23 percent of the workforce had no certification. As noted in the previous 

section, these percentages more than likely reflect the relatively large 

percentage of the SMC workforce made up of junior officers and the 

relatively small percentage made up of senior officers. Figure 9 reflects the 

breakout of the space professional certifications at the three levels at SMC 

during our review. 

Page 34 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
Figure 9: Space Professional Certification Levels for SMC Space Acquisition

Workforce 

Notes: The no certification or level 0 category includes individuals who have not yet attained level 1, 

who are not currently considered credentialed space professionals, or both. We found only one case 

in which a level 1 officer was not concurrently a credentialed space professional. 

Differences in SMC Space 

Acquisition Personnel and 

Personnel Working in 

Classified Space Programs 

Our analysis showed that the acquisition officers at SMC also possess 

fewer of the acquisition and space professional certifications at the higher

levels than those serving in classified space positions.34 Specifically, for the 

acquisition certification levels, we found that as of April 2006, a greater 

percentage of SMC acquisition officers had the lowest certification level 

than did the acquisition officers serving in classified space positions. 

Conversely, a higher percentage of acquisition officers working in 

classified space programs had certifications at levels 2 and 3. Figure 10

depicts these comparisons. 

 34 NRO declined to provide us a detailed breakout of all of its personnel. Therefore, we

could not directly compare SMC personnel working on unclassified space programs to

NRO personnel working on classified space programs. Using Air Force personnel data, we

were able to identify and compare SMC personnel in unclassified programs to some

personnel working on classified space programs at other organizations, including NRO. 

Page 35 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
Figure 10: Acquisition Certification Levels for Classified and SMC Space 

Acquisition Workforces 

Notes: Numbers for each group may add up to more than 100 percent because acquisition officers 

can have certification levels in more than one acquisition category.

Similarly, our analysis showed that those working on classified programs 

have a greater percentage of the higher levels of space certification 

compared to the SMC workforce. We believe this may be a reflection of 

the Air Force’s decision to place more senior officers at NRO as well as a 

reflection of the perceived risk level of classified programs and the need to

place more experienced personnel on these programs. Figure 11 shows the 

comparison of space certification levels for personnel working on 

classified space programs and at SMC. 

Page 36 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
Figure 11: Space Certification Levels for Classified and SMC Space Acquisition

Workforces 

Note: The no certification or level 0 category includes individuals who have not yet attained Level 1, 

who are not currently considered credentialed space professionals, or both. 

Additionally, our analysis showed that acquisition officers working in 

classified space programs have more education and space and acquisition 

experience than do their counterparts in unclassified space programs. 

Specifically, of the acquisition officers who are currently serving in 

classified space positions, about 40 percent have technical master’s 

degrees or higher, whereas 16 percent of those serving in unclassified 

space positions do. The comparable figures for technical bachelor’s 

degrees were 83 and 60 percent, respectively. 

In general, SMC’s acquisition managers had less depth and breadth of 

experience than their classified counterparts. Acquisition managers 

constituted a higher share of entry-level positions at SMC, and a smaller 

share of the most senior positions, than either their classified counterparts 

or those in the Air Force as a whole. Moreover, acquisition managers are 

Page 37 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
encouraged to already have experience in a different specialty, preferably 

at the beginning of their careers.35 However, only a little more than half of 

acquisition managers at SMC had prior experience in a different specialty,

whereas most acquisition managers in classified space programs had such 

experience. Of the 180 acquisition managers we identified as assigned to a 

classified space program in February 2006, 80 percent had had one or 

more prior assignments in another field, and more than half of these were 

in scientific or engineering specialties. Several DOD officials, along with 

officers from the Navy as well as the Air Force, expressed the opinion that 

acquisition management skills are broadly transferable for any type of 

program; therefore, space acquisition managers do not need a distinct 

academic background or type of experience. Yet the classified acquisition 

managers are more likely to have technical degrees and higher

certification levels, reflecting more education, training, and experience 

than their SMC peers—creating, in effect, a specialty for some but not all 

acquisition managers. 

Lower Levels of Education 

and Experience in Space 

Acquisition Workforce Are 

Attributable to Several 

Factors 

The lower levels of technical education and certification in the Air Force 

space acquisition workforce are due to several factors. First, the lower 

levels of certification and experience among acquisition officers at SMC 

have occurred because NRO has received priority in selecting space 

acquisition personnel with higher qualifications, based on a historical 

agreement between the Secretary of Defense and the Director of Central 

Intelligence, as well as on the Air Force’s prioritization plan for acquisition 

officers. Second, the Air Force has not institutionalized a means of 

identifying the space acquisition specialty within any of its existing career

fields. At a minimum, identifying space acquisition as a specialty within 

the acquisition career field could allow the Air Force to identify personnel

and provide standardized training in space acquisition. Finally, training 

that focuses on space acquisition is limited. Without increased space- and

acquisition-related training and a career field or specialty within a career 

field that addresses standardized education and training requirements 

specific to space acquisition, the Air Force may not have the visibility it 

needs over its space acquisition personnel in order to strategically manage 

the workforce and to ensure that these personnel can effectively supervise 

and oversee the development of new space systems. These issues are 

compounded by the decline of acquisition managers entering SMC with 

technical degrees. 

 35 Officer Classification, Air Force Manual 36-2105, October 31, 2004, Attachment 43. 

Page 38 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
We believe that the shortage of qualified space acquisition personnel with 

a technical education has occurred at SMC in part because NRO receives 

priority in selecting space acquisition personnel with higher certification

levels. This priority is founded upon a provision of a 1965 agreement 

between the Secretary of Defense and the Director of Central Intelligence, 

which states that NRO is to receive the best talent appropriately available

from the military services and other agencies. In addition, NRO currently 

receives priority fill status in the Air Force nonrated prioritization plan, 

while Air Force Space Command, which includes SMC, receives only 

entitlement fill status.36 As previously mentioned, this prioritization plan 

serves the purpose of allocating scarce numbers of acquisition officers 

among the various requirements, in an effort to ensure that the most 

critical requirements are filled and that when necessary, vacancies occur 

in the lowest priority organizations. At present, staff organizations such as

Air Force Headquarters have the highest priority, with NRO occupying the 

next highest priority. The major commands, such as Air Force Space

Command, have the lowest priority according to the prioritization plan. 

This means that NRO can choose the better qualified personnel to fill its 

space acquisition positions before SMC does. Moreover, officials from 

NRO and the Office of the Secretary of the Air Force told us that NRO has 

historically been accorded this staffing priority over other Air Force 

locations competing for the same acquisition personnel. In addition, NRO 

has entry-level requirements for its space acquisition positions that are 

higher than the Air Force entry-level requirements established by the 

APDP. 

NRO Priority in Selecting 

Qualified Space Acquisition 

Personnel 

This prioritization plan is currently under review. During the course of our 

review, SMC and Air Force Space Command leadership requested that the

Deputy Air Force Chief of Staff for Personnel reconsider the prioritization 

plan because of SMC’s shortage of senior acquisition personnel. 

Specifically, they asked that SMC receive the same status under the 

prioritization plan as NRO; this means having must fill or priority fill status 

instead of its current entitlement status. Following the February 2006 Air 

Force staffing conference, the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Air 

Force for Acquisition agreed to review the prioritization plan. In June 

2006, the Air Force Chief of Staff and the Director of NRO signed a joint 

 36 Manpower positions are prioritized into three categories: Must Fill, Priority Fill, and 

Entitlement Fill. The fill rate for the must fill category is 100 percent. The manning 

percentage for priority fill is normally 85 percent. The entitlement fill rate is a function of 

the remaining available resources once the must fill and priority fill rate positions are 

appropriately filled. 

Page 39 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
statement of intent aimed at enhancing Air Force-NRO relations, space 

capabilities, and mission performance. Among other things, this statement 

of intent calls for the establishment of a Space Assignment Advisory Board 

to oversee the assignments of Air Force space professionals, including 

those assigned to NRO. According to the statement, this board offers the 

potential to provide a proper balance of Air Force professional manning 

and experience levels between SMC and NRO, but it does not specify that 

this involves any change to SMC’s or NRO’s status under the prioritization 

plan. Additional workforce issues may be addressed in future agreements.

However, as previously mentioned, the Air Force has not conducted an

integrated zero-based needs assessment for the space acquisition 

workforce, as called for by the strategic workforce planning model that is

used by leading private and public sector organizations. Conducting such 

an assessment would help the Air Force to ensure proper staffing of all 

space acquisition positions, such as those at NRO and SMC, because it 

involves identification of gaps that exist between the current and future 

workforces needed to meet program goals. 

Although the Secretary of the Air Force is required to develop a career 

field for officers to ensure that they have the technical competence to 

develop space systems, there is currently no single space acquisition 

career field or specialty. Title 10 of the United States Code contains a 

provision requiring the Air Force to develop a career field for officers with 

technical competence in space-related matters, including the capability to

develop space systems.37 We believe that the capability to develop space 

systems includes the capability to acquire them. The law also requires 

technical competence in operating space systems and in developing space 

doctrine and concepts of space operation, both of which are encompassed 

in the training required by the Air Force’s space operations career field.

However, the space operations career field does not include space 

acquisition personnel, and there is no corresponding career field or 

specialty to develop technical competence in space acquisition. Moreover, 

of the acquisition career fields that encompass the space acquisition 

workforce, scientists and engineers are required to possess a degree in a 

technical area, whereas acquisition managers are not required to hold a 

technical degree. We have previously reported that DOD and Air Force 

officials have expressed concern that there are not enough experienced 

acquisition managers to run space programs or enough experts in software 

Lack of a Designated Career 

Field 

 37 10 U.S.C. § 8084. 

Page 40 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
engineering. These officials also commented that acquisition managers for 

space systems are often not equipped to understand what is behind a 

contractor’s proposal.38

The Air Force has not specifically identified the personnel who work on 

space acquisition programs within any of its existing career fields because, 

as previously mentioned, there is an ongoing debate within the Air Force 

over the extent to which space acquisition is different enough from nonspace acquisition to warrant tailored training, education, career path 

development, or a combination of these. However, DOD believes that 

space is different because of the complexity of space systems and the 

inability to recall space systems once they are launched. The need for 

space systems that operate properly upon launch is reflected in the fact

that a high proportion of the cost of developing a space system is devoted 

to system acquisition rather than to operations and support, as is the case 

with non-space acquisition programs. Personnel with technical and space 

acquisition knowledge are therefore important in ensuring that complex 

space systems are developed and acquired successfully. 

As previously mentioned, the acquisition manager career field is the one 

acquisition career field in the space acquisition workforce that does not 

require a technical degree. We believe that at a minimum, establishing a 

space acquisition specialty within the Air Force’s existing acquisition 

manager career field39 could identify the space acquisition workforce and 

direct standardized education and training requirements specific to space

acquisition for all personnel involved in managing space acquisition 

programs. Although we are not arguing for a separate category for space 

acquisition within the DAWIA construct, we do believe that establishing a 

specialty within the Air Force’s acquisition manager career field would 

also provide the Air Force with a mechanism to apply strategic workforce 

management principles to the space acquisition workforce, as is done by 

leading public and private organizations. Without a career field or 

specialty within a career field that addresses standardized education and 

 38 GAO, Defense Acquisitions: Incentives and Pressures That Drive Problems Affecting 

Satellite and Related Acquisitions, GAO-05-570R (Washington, D.C.: June 23, 2005). 

39 According to Air Force Instruction 36-2101, p.6, an Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) is

the basic grouping of positions requiring similar skills and qualifications. An AFSC is 

further grouped into career field ladders, career field subdivisions, and career fields to

provide for career development in different aspects of a career field. An AFSC may be 

subdivided by alphabetical “shredouts” to identify specialization in a specific type of

equipment or function. See also Air Force Manual 36-2105, p. 5.

Page 41 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
training requirements specific to space acquisition, the Air Force may lack

visibility over the capabilities and career paths of its space acquisition 

personnel and therefore may not have the ability to strategically manage 

the workforce and ensure that space acquisition personnel can effectively 

supervise and oversee development of new space systems. 

In addition, there has been a decrease in the number of acquisition officers 

entering SMC with technical degrees, a pattern that has paralleled the 

overall decline in U.S. citizens and permanent residents earning bachelor’s 

degrees in science and engineering at U.S. institutions in the 1990s. The 

percentage of new acquisition managers coming into the Air Force with 

technical degrees, including those in charge of acquiring space systems, 

has declined over the past 15 years, from 68 percent in 1990 to 16 percent

in 2005. There has been a similar decrease in new acquisition managers at 

SMC who possess technical degrees during this same period, although Air

Force Space Command, which includes SMC, has more officers with 

technical bachelor’s degrees than does the Air Force as a whole. Title 10 of 

the United States Code40 directs the Secretary of the Air Force to establish 

and implement policies and procedures to develop a career field for Air 

Force officers with technical competence in space-related matters so that 

these officers have the capability to develop space doctrine and concepts

of space operations, develop space systems, and operate space systems. 

Although acquisition managers, unlike scientists and engineers, are not 

required to hold technical degrees, officials and space acquisition officers 

we interviewed considered it desirable. Because this decrease in 

technically educated acquisition managers parallels a decline during the 

1990s in the number of U.S. citizens and permanent residents receiving

bachelor’s degrees in science and engineering, it appears at least partly 

attributable to the drop in the national supply rather than to the 

preferences of Air Force officials. Entering the acquisition workforce with 

a technical degree could be particularly useful at SMC, where there is a 

high proportion of junior officers who, as acquisition managers, begin 

supervising experienced contractors early in their careers. Conversely, 

acquisition managers without technical degrees may be at a disadvantage 

in evaluating proposals and conducting progress reviews. Moreover, the 

overall decline in the national pool of technical expertise also limits the 

Air Force’s ability to rely on contractors and civilians to offset the decline 

of expertise among military personnel. Over the past few years, however, 

the national number of U.S. citizens and permanent residents earning 

Decrease in Acquisition 

Officers with Technical 

Degrees Entering SMC

 40 10 U.S.C. § 8084. 

Page 42 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
bachelor’s degrees in science and engineering has increased, but the 

number of new acquisition managers entering the Air Force with technical 

degrees continues to decrease, according to Air Force Personnel Center 

data. 

The limited availability of training that focuses on space acquisition also 

contributes to the shortage of technically proficient personnel. For 

example, DAU does not incorporate space-specific training into its 

required curricula for the acquisition workforce and the Air Force’s NSSI 

offers limited acquisition content in its curricula for the space workforce. 

NSSI’s 4-week intermediate- and senior-level courses—Space 200 and 

Space 300—have 2 1/2 and 3 days of acquisition content, respectively. 

Although DAU, in collaboration with NSSI, has developed a course that 

focuses on the acquisition process guidance for DOD space programs—

known as the National Security Space Acquisition Policy—this course is in 

the form of a continuous learning module (CLM), which is an online 

course. We note that after our inquiry about the amount of space 

acquisition training, NSSI designated this space CLM as a prerequisite to 

the Space 200 course. Because of the lack of space acquisition training, 

SMC has developed a space acquisition school, which provides initial 

qualification training before an officer is assigned to a system program 

office. Similarly, NRO has an Acquisition Center of Excellence, which 

provides NRO-centered acquisition training to less experienced personnel 

assigned to NRO. However, without adding more space-specific content to

DAU’s courses and adding more acquisition content to NSSI’s courses, the 

Air Force may lose an opportunity to broaden the pool of personnel who 

are qualified to serve in space acquisition positions. Moreover, as the Air 

Force prepares to carry out force reductions, it will become increasingly 

important to get the best-qualified people to fill space acquisition 

positions; moreover, those who are assigned may not have the luxury of 

extended training periods. As a result, the Air Force may not have enough

technically proficient space acquisition personnel within the existing 

space acquisition workforce to meet national security space needs. 

Limited Space Acquisition 

Training 

Congress and DOD have repeatedly emphasized that qualified space 

personnel are critical to the success of space systems. Although the Air 

Force has made progress in identifying, training, and providing career path

guidance to its space cadre, more remains to be accomplished. The Air 

Force is managing its existing space acquisition workforce using some 

facets of the strategic workforce planning model that is used by leading 

organizations; however, neither DOD nor the Air Force has developed a 

separate workforce strategy, as they have for other workforce groups, 

Conclusions 

Page 43 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
because there is a lack of consensus about the merits of doing so. While 

the lack of a separate strategy is not necessarily a deficiency, we continue

to believe that DOD and the Air Force need to ensure that the personnel 

who are essential to developing and acquiring national security space 

systems are effectively managed. Without performing an integrated and 

zero-based space acquisition workforce needs assessment and using the 

results to inform its force reduction planning, the Air Force may not be 

able to manage the impact of its planned force reductions on the space 

acquisition workforce or take actions to mitigate the impact to ensure it 

has the quantity and quality of space acquisition personnel needed to

accomplish its space mission. Moreover, the Air Force has not developed a 

space acquisition career field or specialty for its officers to ensure 

technical competence in space acquisition-related matters, including the

ability to develop space systems. Without increased space and acquisitionrelated training and a career field or specialty that addresses standardized 

education, training, and career path development requirements specific to 

space acquisition, the Air Force may lack visibility over the capabilities 

and career paths of its space acquisition personnel and therefore may not 

have the ability ensure that space acquisition personnel can effectively 

supervise and oversee development of new space systems. Additionally, 

without a career field or specialty, the Air Force may find it more difficult 

to apply strategic workforce management principles to the space 

acquisition workforce. Without adequate numbers of technically proficient 

personnel to meet national security space needs, the government may 

have to rely more on contractors to fill the gap, but reliance on contractors 

may become more difficult as the Air Force conducts its force shaping.

Current force shaping plans call for 25 percent cuts in contractor and 

FFRDC support. SMC currently relies on an FFRDC to supplement its 

technical support needs. Without such support, the Air Force may be 

unable to maintain the necessary expertise on legacy systems and fully 

support emerging space programs. 

We recommend that the Secretary of Defense direct the Secretary of the 

Air Force to take the following three actions: 

• Direct that an integrated, zero-based needs assessment of space 

acquisition personnel be performed and then incorporated into the Air 

Force’s force reduction planning and process improvement efforts in order 

to ensure that the resulting force structure is optimally balanced among 

workforce segments—that is, military, civilian, contractor, those who 

work on classified and unclassified programs, and FFRDC support 

Recommendations for 

Executive Action 

Page 44 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
personnel—and functional areas, such as classified and unclassified space 

systems. 

• Institutionalize and manage a space-specific specialty within the Air 

Force’s acquisition manager career field in order to ensure that all 

incumbents in the space acquisition workforce, including personnel at 

SMC and NRO, have strong technical backgrounds and to better manage 

the career paths and retention of technical personnel in accordance with 

strategic workforce management principles. 

• Improve training by providing greater acquisition-specific content in the 

Air Force’s NSSI’s curricula in order to broaden the pool of personnel who 

are qualified to fill space acquisition positions. 

We recommend that the Secretary of Defense direct the Under Secretary 

of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics to take the following 

action: 

• Improve training by bolstering space-specific content in DAU’s curricula in

order to broaden the pool of personnel who are qualified to fill space 

acquisition positions. 

Both DOD and NRO provided us comments on a draft of this report. DOD 

provided specific comments on whether it concurred or did not concur 

with each of our recommendations. NRO provided comments; however, it

declined to concur or not concur with our recommendations because it 

believes that the recommendations fall within the purview of the Air 

Force. 

DOD concurred with our recommendation on improving training at DAU 

but only partially concurred with our remaining recommendations. 

Regarding our recommendation that the Air Force conduct an integrated,

zero-based needs assessment and incorporate it into the Air Force’s force 

reduction planning and process improvement efforts, DOD partially 

concurred, stating that a needs assessment of space acquisition personnel 

is important and that it must be integrated as part of the component’s 

force planning and process improvement initiatives. This statement 

mirrors our recommendation and reaffirms our discussion in this report. 

DOD partially concurred with our recommendation that the Air Force 

institutionalize and manage a space-specific specialty within the Air 

Force’s acquisition manager career field. We agree with DOD that the Air 

Force Space Professional Development Program has identified and 

continues to track space-specific experience, and we relied on the space

Agency Comments 

and Our Evaluation 

Page 45 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
experience codes found in Air Force Space Command’s database for 

portions of our analysis. DOD also stated that this process enables 

effective career management while still affording the flexibility to use 

individuals in other assignments; however, we think that its process still 

does not provide adequate visibility over the career paths of space 

acquisition personnel. For example, we attempted to obtain certain 

information, such as promotion rates, for space acquisition personnel, and 

found that the Air Force was not tracking this information as part of the 

Air Force Space Professional Development Program. We believe that 

having a specialty would allow the Air Force to track such information to 

provide more effective strategic human capital management. Furthermore, 

implementing our recommendation would not diminish the Air Force’s 

flexibility to use these individuals in any positions that Air Force 

requirements dictate. As our report points out, a specialty within the 

acquisition manager career field would be a better means of providing 

visibility and management of personnel involved in managing space 

acquisition programs, such as by tracking the numbers of officers (and 

civilians) who are attaining senior levels and establishing standardized 

training and education requirements specific to space acquisition. As the 

Air Force determines its priorities, we continue to believe that at a 

minimum, having a space-specific specialty would give it the visibility that 

it currently lacks over this important segment of its workforce. 

DOD partially concurred with our recommendation to improve training by 

providing greater acquisition-specific content in the curricula of the Air 

Force’s NSSI. Although DOD concurred that more space acquisition 

training is needed, it noted that NSSI is only one forum for such training. 

However, we note that NSSI is, according to its own mission statement, 

the DOD center of excellence for space education throughout the national 

security space community and that its acquisition content is limited. While

we acknowledge that there are other venues for training in space 

acquisition, including DAU, we focused on NSSI because of its role as 

DOD’s single focal point for space education and training. 

Lastly, DOD concurred with our recommendation to improve training by 

bolstering space-specific content in DAU’s curricula. In its comments, 

DOD listed some of the ways in which DAU has expanded its support of 

the space acquisition community. We acknowledge these efforts and noted 

in our report that DAU has already developed a CLM related to the space

acquisition process. However, we continue to believe that additional 

space-specific content is needed in DAU’s curricula in order to increase 

the pool of personnel who are qualified to fill space acquisition positions. 

Adding such space-specific content would allow more acquisition officers 

Page 46 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
to receive a baseline level of training in space acquisition through DAU. 

This baseline level of training would help ensure that acquisition officers 

do not arrive in space acquisition assignments with little or no knowledge 

of space-specific acquisitions, such as is currently often the case at the 

SMC. In this way, the recommendation is also intended to maximize Air 

Force flexibility in assigning its acquisition officers to space acquisition 

positions, the importance of which was noted by DOD in its response to 

our second recommendation. 

NRO provided us comments regarding specific issues discussed in the 

report. Regarding our observation that the percentage of acquisition 

personnel certified at the highest level at SMC dropped between 1996 and 

2005, NRO stated that its hiring policies may currently exacerbate the 

problems at SMC. We agree. We also agree with NRO, and have stated in 

our report, that a variety of factors have contributed to SMC’s shortage of 

qualified space acquisition personnel with a technical education. In an 

atmosphere of overall shortage, however, SMC’s lower staffing priority 

means that other organizations therefore have a higher level of access to a 

comparatively senior workforce, whose members are, as NRO stated, able

to work on complex systems, hold high clearances, and work in a 

multiagency environment with significant levels of autonomy. Moreover, 

we acknowledge, and stated in our report, that there is no consensus on a 

space acquisition career field within DOD. However, as we have 

mentioned earlier, we continue to believe that a space acquisition 

specialty within the existing acquisition manager career field could both 

strengthen career path management and ensure that those who manage 

space programs have strong technical backgrounds by addressing 

standardized training and education requirements specific to space 

acquisition. In addition, we also agree with NRO and noted in our report 

that there are a variety of factors that have contributed to Air Force-wide 

acquisition workforce shortages, such as 1990s workforce management 

decisions. 

DOD and NRO comments are reprinted in their entirety in appendix II and 

appendix III, respectively. DOD and NRO did not provide technical 

comments on this report. 

We are sending copies of this report to interested congressional 

committees; the Secretary of Defense; the DOD Executive Agent for 

Space; the Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force; the Commanding 

General, U.S. Air Force Space Command; and the Director, National 

Reconnaissance Office. We will also make copies available to others upon 

Page 47 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
request. In addition, this report is available at no charge on the GAO Web 

site at http://www.gao.gov. 

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

at (202) 512-5431 or dagostinod@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices of 

Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page 

of this report. GAO staff who made key contributions to this report are 

listed in appendix IV. 

Sincerely yours, 

Davi M. D’Agostino 

Director, Defense Capabilities 

 and Management 

Page 48 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology Appendix I: Scope and Methodology 

To determine the extent to which the Air Force has addressed strategies 

for critical skill sets, training, recruiting, promotion, and career path 

development for the space acquisition workforce, we reviewed human 

capital strategies pertaining to the Department of Defense (DOD) 

acquisition workforce and the Air Force space cadre. We compared the 

DOD and Air Force documents to the strategic human capital planning 

model that is generally accepted by the National Academy for Public 

Administration, the Office of Personnel Management, and other leading

public and private sector organizations. We analyzed the documents to 

ascertain whether they addressed each of the elements of a 

comprehensive workforce planning strategy as well as whether they 

addressed the five career stages listed above. We also discussed workforce 

strategic planning with cognizant officials in the Office of the Secretary of

Defense; the National Security Space Office; U.S. Air Force Space 

Command, Peterson Air Force Base, Colorado; the Air Force Manpower 

Agency, Randolph Air Force Base, Texas; the Office of the Secretary of the 

Air Force for Acquisition, Arlington, Virginia; the Directorate of Space

Acquisition, Arlington, Virginia; and the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff 

of the Air Force for Manpower and Personnel, Arlington, Virginia. We 

noted the actions that DOD and the Air Force had taken to manage the Air 

Force’s workforce using a strategic workforce management approach, but 

we did not evaluate the sufficiency of the actions they took. To gather 

information on Army and Navy strategies and plans, we interviewed 

officials at the Army Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations and 

Plans, Arlington, Virginia; U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command, 

Arlington, Virginia; and the Office of the Navy Space Cadre Advisor, 

Arlington, Virginia. 

To determine the extent to which the Air Force has addressed how 

sufficient numbers of space acquisition personnel are provided to meet 

DOD’s current and projected national security space needs, we collected

and compared recent data on acquisition positions and personnel from the 

Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition and from 

the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff of the Air Force for Manpower and 

Personnel, Arlington, Virginia, as well as from Air Force Headquarters. We 

also received overall workforce figures from the National Reconnaissance 

Office, Chantilly, Virginia, that were current as of March 2006. We limited 

our analysis to technical acquisition personnel who are included in the Air 

Force’s credentialed space professional program, which corresponded to 

Air Force Specialty Codes 61S (scientist), 62E (engineer), and 63A 

(acquisition manager). We excluded Air Force Specialty Codes 64P 

(contracting) and 65F (financial management) from our scope since these 

acquisition codes are not currently included as Air Force credentialed 

Page 49 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology 

space professionals. We also excluded civilians and enlisted personnel 

from our scope, since the Air Force has not completed its identification of 

civilian and enlisted space professionals, as well as contractors, since 

contractors are not currently included as Air Force credentialed space 

professionals. We also interviewed officials at the Air Force Personnel 

Center, Randolph Air Force Base, Texas; U.S. Air Force Space Command, 

Peterson Air Force Base, Colorado; Space and Missile Systems Center, Los 

Angeles Air Force Base, California; the Office of the Secretary of the Air 

Force for Acquisition, Arlington, Virginia; and the Office of Security and 

Special Programs Oversight, Arlington, Virginia. 

To determine the extent to which the Air Force has addressed whether 

space acquisition personnel are adequately qualified for their positions, we 

collected and analyzed data on space acquisition positions and personnel 

from U.S. Air Force Space Command, Peterson Air Force Base, Colorado, 

and the Space and Missile Systems Center, Los Angeles Air Force Base, 

California, and conducted discussion groups about topics including 

education and prior experience with junior and midgrade officers at Space 

and Missile Systems Center, Los Angeles Air Force Base, California. We 

reviewed National Science Foundation data as of May 2006 and Air Force 

Personnel Center data as of March 2006 in order to determine the extent to 

which new Air Force acquisition managers hold technical degrees and the 

extent to which the numbers represent a national trend. We also 

interviewed officials at Air Force Personnel Center, Randolph Air Force 

Base, Texas; the Office of the Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition, 

Arlington, Virginia; and the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff of the Air 

Force for Manpower and Personnel, Arlington, Virginia. The Space and 

Missile Systems Center database is current as of February 2006, and the 

space professional database is current as of March 2006. We used the 

Space and Missile Systems Center database and the space professional 

database, obtained from Air Force Space Command, to analyze the 

certification and experience levels of acquisition officers at the Space and 

Missile Systems Center and Air Force-wide. We did this by examining their 

degree and certification levels, as well as duty histories, and comparing 

them with the certification requirements of the Air Force’s Acquisition 

Professional Development Program and Space Professional Development 

Program. To assess comparative certification and experience levels 

between unclassified and classified space acquisition personnel, we used

the Space and Missile Systems Center database and the space professional 

database and compared the results. We also used these two databases to

analyze the prior experience and education of acquisition managers 

working on unclassified space systems and acquisition managers working 

on classified space systems. We examined acquisition officers’ degree and 

Page 50 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology 

certification levels, as well as duty histories, and compared them with the 

certification requirements of the Air Force’s acquisition professional 

development program and space professional development program. To 

capture the acquisition officers working on unclassified space systems, we 

used all Space and Missile Systems Center acquisition officers except for 

those acquisition officers working in the Space Superiority system 

program office, which is a classified space system. Although we did not 

have detailed personnel data from the National Reconnaissance Office, we

were able to search the space professional database for certain key 

elements that were known to indicate classified space positions; and we 

used the acquisition officers thus identified to represent the classified 

space acquisition workforce. These key elements included whether the 

acquisition officer worked at the Space and Missile Systems Center’s 

Space Superiority system program office; was in a space position that 

required a very high-level security clearance; or was in a space position 

with an experience code that indicated work at certain classified space 

locations, including the National Reconnaissance Office. In the interest of

issuing an unclassified product, we did not attempt to identify whether 

specific individuals worked at the National Reconnaissance Office or 

another intelligence agency. We also reviewed applicable National 

Reconnaissance Office directives and interviewed officials from the 

National Reconnaissance Office, Chantilly, Virginia; the Space and Missile 

Systems Center, Los Angeles Air Force Base, California; and Air Force 

Headquarters. In addition, we used the Space and Missile Systems Center

database and the space professional database to analyze records of 

officers who either work in the Space Superiority system program office 

or have had intelligence-related assignments in the past. We assessed the 

reliability of Air Force Space Command’s space professional database and 

the Space and Missile Systems Center database by (1) reviewing existing 

information about the data and the system that provided them, 

(2) interviewing Air Force and contractor officials knowledgeable about 

the data, and (3) comparing information in the databases. We determined

that the data in these databases were sufficiently reliable for the purposes 

of this report. We also assessed the reliability of the data provided by the 

Air Force Personnel Center and determined that these data were 

sufficiently reliable for the purposes of this report. To determine the 

extent to which acquisition is reflected in space training, we reviewed and

discussed the curricula of the National Security Space Institute’s Space

200 and 300 courses; to determine the extent to which space is reflected in 

acquisition training, we reviewed the Defense Acquisition University’s 

catalog. We also interviewed officials from both organizations, including 

Defense Acquisition University consultants to the National Security Space 

Institute and the Space and Missile Systems Center. 

Page 51 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology 

Part of our analysis regarding the quantity and quality of the space 

acquisition workforce was limited because of the lack of data from the 

National Reconnaissance Office. As noted above, the National 

Reconnaissance Office did provide us the overall number of Air Force 

personnel assigned to that agency, but it did not provide us information on 

the education, experience, or expertise of its space acquisition personnel.

As a result, we could not directly compare the education, experience, or 

expertise of the space acquisition workforce at the Space and Missile 

Systems Center and the National Reconnaissance Office, and we could not 

compare the workforces at these two locations collectively to the Air 

Force acquisition workforce overall. In this regard, we were only able to 

compare the Space and Missile Systems Center personnel to the Air Force 

acquisition workforce overall. 

We performed our work from October 2005 through June 2006 in 

accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 

Page 52 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
Appendix II: Comments from the Department Appendix II: Comments from the Department of Defense 

of Defense 

Page 53 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
Appendix II: Comments from the Department 

of Defense 

Page 54 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
Appendix II: Comments from the Department 

of Defense 

Page 55 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
Appendix III: Comments from the National Appendix III: Comments from the National Reconnaissance Office 

Reconnaissance Office 

Note: GAO comments 

supplementing those in 

the report text appear at 

the end of this appendix. 

Page 56 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
Appendix III: Comments from the National 

Reconnaissance Office 

See comment 1. 

Page 57 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
Appendix III: Comments from the National 

Reconnaissance Office 

Page 58 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
Appendix III: Comments from the National 

Reconnaissance Office 

The following is GAO’s comment on NRO’s letter dated September 6, 2006. 

1. NRO also commented upon GAO’s requests for information related to 

NRO’s space acquisition personnel. The NRO did provide us with the 

overall number of Air Force personnel assigned to NRO, but in its 

letter providing this information, NRO noted that it could not 

disaggregate the personnel information without revealing intelligence 

community information. We submitted a second request for 

information to the Air Force Personnel Center, but this request was 

ultimately forwarded to NRO, on the grounds that only NRO could 

provide the data, where it was declined for similar reasons. In our 

report, we noted that we did not have detailed information about 

NRO’s space acquisition workforce, as we did for SMC’s space 

acquisition workforce, since this affected our ability to report on the 

entire space acquisition workforce. 

GAO Comment 

Page 59 GAO-06-908 Defense Space Activities
Appendix IV: 

A

GAO Contact and Staff 

cknowledgments 

Page 60 GAO-06-908

Appendix IV: GAO Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgments 

Davi M. D’Agostino (202) 512-5431 or dagostinod@gao.gov

In addition to the contact named above, Lorelei St. James, Assistant 

Director; Gabrielle A. Carrington; Barbara Hills; Linda S. Keefer; Ron La 

Due Lake; Julie Matta; Sally L. Newman; Jerome Sandau; and Cheryl 

Weissman made key contributions to this report. 

Defense Space Activities

GAO Contact 

Acknowledgments 

(350741) 
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