United States Government Accountability Office

Washington, DC 20548 

September 4, 2008 

Congressional Addressees 

Subject: Defense Health Care: Oversight of Military Services’ Post-Deployment Health 

Reassessment Completion Rates Is Limited

Military servicemembers engaged in combat tours in Afghanistan and Iraq are at risk of

developing combat-related mental health conditions, including post-traumatic stress disorder 

(PTSD). In many cases, signs of potential mental health conditions do not surface until

months after servicemembers return from deployment. In 2004, Army researchers published 

a series of articles that indicated a significant increase in the number of servicemembers 

reporting mental health concerns 90 to 120 days after returning from deployment, compared 

with mental health concerns reported before or soon after deployment.1

 These findings led 

the Department of Defense (DOD) in March 2005 to develop requirements and policies for the 

post-deployment health reassessment (PDHRA) as part of its continuum of deployment

health assessments for servicemembers. PDHRA is a screening tool for military 

servicemembers; it is designed to identify and address their health concerns—including 

mental health concerns—90 to 180 days after return from deployment. Servicemembers 

answer a set of questions about their physical and mental health conditions and concerns, 

and health care providers review the answers and refer servicemembers for further 

evaluation and treatment if necessary. A November 2007 study showed that a larger number 

of servicemembers indicated mental health concerns on their PDHRAs than on assessments 

earlier in their deployment cycles.2

Although DOD established PDHRA requirements and policies, it gave the military services 

discretion to implement them to meet their unique needs as long as the services adhere to the 

requirements and policies. DOD oversees the military services’ compliance with PDHRA 

requirements through its deployment health assessment quality assurance program and is 

required to report on the quality assurance program annually to the Armed Services 

Committees of the House of Representatives and Senate.3

 In June 2007, we reported that 

DOD’s oversight of its deployment health assessments does not provide DOD or Congress 

with the information needed to evaluate DOD and the military services’ compliance with 

 1

P. D. Bliese, K. M. Wright, A. B. Adler, et al., Screening for Traumatic Stress Among Re-Deploying Soldiers, U.S.

Army Medical Research Unit-Europe Research Report 2004-001 (Heidelberg, Germany: USAMRU-E, 2004) and 

C. W. Hoge, C. A. Castro, S. C. Messer, et al., “Combat Duty in Iraq and Afghanistan, Mental Health Problems, and 

Barriers to Care,” The New England Journal of Medicine, 351, (2004.) 

2

C.S. Milliken, J.L. Auchterlonie, C.W. Hoge, “Longitudinal Assessment of Mental Health Problems Among Active 

and Reserve Component Soldiers Returning From the Iraq War,” Journal of the American Medical Association, 

298(18) (2007):2141-2148. 

3

10 U.S.C. § 1073b(a). 

 GAO-08-1025R Post-Deployment Health Reassessments 
deployment health assessment requirements.4

 That report is part of a body of work in which 

we identified weaknesses in DOD’s quality assurance program.5

The Senate Committee on Armed Services directed us to review DOD’s oversight of PDHRA, 

and the House Committee on Armed Services and 11 senators also expressed interest in this 

work.6

 In this report, we focus on how DOD ensures that servicemembers complete the 

PDHRA.7

 Specifically, we discuss how well DOD’s quality assurance program oversees the 

military services’ compliance with the requirement that they ensure that servicemembers 

complete the PDHRA. 

To evaluate how well DOD’s quality assurance program oversees the military services’ 

compliance with the requirement that they ensure servicemembers complete the PDHRA, we 

reviewed DOD’s policies for PDHRA and its deployment health assessment quality assurance 

program.8

 We also reviewed our June 2007 report on the implementation of DOD’s quality 

assurance program, which is based on 2005 and 2006 data. We interviewed officials from 

DOD and the military services to determine whether the process and procedures DOD’s 

quality assurance program uses to oversee the military services’ compliance with deployment 

health assessments have changed since our 2007 report. In addition, we analyzed all quarterly 

reports submitted to DOD’s quality assurance program from the four services for 2007. We 

also analyzed the four reports the military services submitted to DOD’s quality assurance 

program for the first quarter of 2008, and the July 2008 monthly report from the Armed 

Forces Health Surveillance Center (AFHSC).9

 All of these reports are submitted to DOD’s 

quality assurance program. Furthermore, we used these interviews and documents to gain 

additional knowledge of and clarification on the instructions and guidance for PDHRA. 

We conducted our work from February 2008 through July 2008, in accordance with generally 

accepted government auditing standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform 

the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our 

findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that the evidence 

 4

GAO, Defense Health Care: Comprehensive Oversight Framework Needed to Help Ensure Effective 

Implementation of a Deployment Health Quality Assurance Program, GAO-07-831 (Washington, D.C.: June 22,

2007). 

5

GAO, Military Personnel: Top Management Attention is Needed to Address Long-standing Problems with

Determining Medical and Physical Fitness of the Reserve Force, GAO-06-105 (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 27, 2006); 

GAO, DOD Civilian Personnel: Greater Oversight and Quality Assurance Needed to Ensure Force Health

Protection and Surveillance for Those Deployed, GAO-06-1085 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 29, 2006); GAO, Defense 

Health Care: Force Health Protection and Surveillance Policy Compliance Was Mixed, but Appears Better for 

Recent Deployments, GAO-05-120 (Washington, D.C.: Nov. 12, 2004); and GAO, Defense Health Care: Quality

Assurance Process Needed to Improve Force Health Protection and Surveillance, GAO-03-1041 (Washington,

D.C.: Sept. 19, 2003). 

6

S. Rep. No. 110-77, at 360 (2007). 

7

For purposes of this report, “servicemembers” include active duty and Reserve components. 

8

DOD’s policy delegates the responsibility for executing the quality assurance program to the Deputy Assistant 

Secretary of Defense for Force Health Protection and Readiness. In this report, we refer to this quality assurance

program as “DOD’s quality assurance program.” 

9

AFHSC is a DOD agency that performs comprehensive medical surveillance and reporting on rates of diseases 

and injuries among servicemembers. AFHSC operates the Defense Medical Surveillance System (DMSS), which 

contains data on diseases and medical events and longitudinal data on personnel and deployments, including 

deployment health assessments. Each of the military services is required to electronically submit completed 

PDHRAs to DMSS. 

2 GAO-08-1025R Post-Deployment Health Reassessments
obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit 

objectives. 

Results in Brief 

DOD’s quality assurance program has limitations and does not allow the department to 

accurately assess whether the military services ensure that servicemembers complete the 

PDHRA. DOD’s quality assurance program relies on quarterly reports from each military 

service, monthly reports from AFHSC, and site visits to military installations to oversee the 

military services’ compliance with deployment health assessment requirements, including 

completion of PDHRA. Each of these sources of information has limitations. The military 

services’ quarterly reports and the monthly reports from AFHSC do not provide the 

information DOD needs to accurately assess the military services’ PDHRA completion rates, 

which would allow DOD to determine if the military services have ensured that 

servicemembers completed the PDHRA. These reports do not allow DOD to calculate a 

completion rate because they do not provide essential information, such as the total number 

of servicemembers who returned from deployment and should have completed the PDHRA in 

that quarter or month. Furthermore, DOD cannot use information collected from site visits to 

validate the services’ quarterly reports because the small number of site visits constitutes an 

insufficient sample for validation purposes. In our 2007 report, we recommended that DOD 

make enhancements to its quality assurance program, which would allow the department to 

better evaluate compliance with deployment health requirements. Although DOD concurred 

with the recommendation included in the 2007 report, as of June 2008, the department had 

not implemented the recommendation. As a result, DOD’s quality assurance program cannot 

provide decision makers with reasonable assurance that servicemembers complete PDHRA. 

Overall, DOD concurred with our report’s findings and conclusions; however, DOD identified 

several items in the report that it addressed in written comments. DOD suggested that the 

function of oversight is beyond the scope of the quality assurance program. Additionally, 

DOD commented that the department is taking steps that it believes will resolve some of the 

issues we note in this report. However, DOD did not provide us with relevant details or 

evidence pertaining to these efforts. We believe that oversight is an essential function of the 

quality assurance program and that the program currently does not receive the information 

necessary to perform this function. 

Background 

Screenings and assessments of servicemembers’ physical and mental health status are to 

occur at several times during the deployment cycle. These assessments are the predeployment health assessment, the post-deployment health assessment (PDHA), and PDHRA. 

(See enclosure I for a description of the purpose and timing of these assessments.) 

DOD developed requirements that all military services must follow when administering the 

PDHRA, although DOD allows the military services flexibility in administering the 

assessment based on their unique needs and organizations. In administering the PDHRA, all 

services use a standardized form that contains demographic and health care screening

questions. The health screening questions focus on servicemembers’ current physical and 

mental health conditions and concerns. (See enclosure II for a copy of the PDHRA form.) 

3 GAO-08-1025R Post-Deployment Health Reassessments
Servicemembers are given the option of answering the health screening questions. DOD’s 

PDHRA requirements are:10

• Military services must ensure that servicemembers complete the PDHRA within 90 to 

180 days after returning from deployment.11 DOD has designated the PDHRA as a 

“commander program,” meaning that unit commanders at military installations are 

responsible for ensuring that their servicemembers complete PDHRAs within this time 

frame. 

• Servicemembers’ PDHRA forms are to be reviewed by a health care provider—including 

primary care physicians, physician assistants, and nurse practitioners—who must certify 

that the assessments were reviewed by signing the form. 

• Health care providers are to interview servicemembers who report any health concerns 

on their PDHRA forms.

• After the PDHRA form is reviewed, it is to be placed in a servicemember’s military health 

record. A copy of the completed PDHRA form is also to be submitted electronically by the 

military services to DOD’s Defense Medical Surveillance System (DMSS). The system is a 

central repository of medical surveillance data for the U.S. armed forces that is operated 

by AFHSC. 

DOD established a deployment health quality assurance program in January 2004 to ensure 

that servicemembers receive deployment health assessments as required.12 Although DOD’s 

program predates the PDHRA, DOD uses the quality assurance program to oversee 

compliance with PDHRA requirements.13 As of June 2008, DOD’s quality assurance program 

was staffed with one full-time equivalent position.14

DOD’S Deployment Health Quality Assurance Program Cannot Accurately Assess 

Military Services’ PDHRA Completion Rates 

DOD’s quality assurance program relies on multiple sources of data to oversee the military 

services’ compliance with deployment health requirements, including completion of 

PDHRAs. Taken individually or as a whole, these data do not allow the department to 

accurately assess whether PDHRAs are being completed. 

 10Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs Memorandum, “Post-Deployment Health Reassessment,” 

(Mar. 10, 2005), and Department of Defense Instruction 6490.03, Section E4.A3.2.12, “Deployment Health,” 

(Aug. 11, 2006). 

11Servicemembers who are deployed overseas for more than 30 continuous days to locations without permanent 

military treatment facilities are required to complete PDHRA. It is the commander’s decision whether 

servicemembers who do not meet the criteria complete these health assessments. 

12The quality assurance program was required by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998, 

Pub. L. No. 105-85, § 765(a)(1), 111 Stat. 1629, 1826 (1997) (codified as amended at 10 U.S.C. § 1074f(d)). 

13DOD’s policy and implementing guidance for the program is contained in a 2004 policy memorandum, Assistant 

Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs, “Policy for Department of Defense Deployment Health Quality Assurance 

Program,” (Jan. 9, 2004). DOD subsequently issued additional guidance for the quality assurance program in 2007. 

DOD Instruction 6200.05, “Force Health Protection (FHP) Quality Assurance (QA) Program,” (Feb. 16, 2007). 

14According to DOD’s quality assurance program manager, other DOD and military services staff provide analytical 

assistance to the quality assurance program as needed. 

4 GAO-08-1025R Post-Deployment Health Reassessments
The military services’ quarterly reports to DOD’s quality assurance program do not provide 

the information DOD needs to accurately assess PDHRA completion rates for each of the 

military services. DOD’s quality assurance policy requires the services to report (1) the 

number of servicemembers who deployed and returned from deployment and (2) the number 

of post-deployment health assessments completed, including PDHRAs. This information is 

essential to help DOD accurately determine completion rates of PDHRAs, as well as other 

deployment health assessments, across the military services. In our 2007 report, we 

recommended that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs enforce the 

requirement for the services to provide consistent information on all deployment health 

requirements on a quarterly basis. Although DOD concurred, we found that the data included 

in the quarterly reports for 2007 and the first quarter of 2008 remain inconsistent and 

incomplete. 

Because DOD does not provide specific standards for collecting and reporting this required 

information, there are inconsistencies within a service and among the services in what 

information is included in each quarterly report. For example, we found inconsistencies 

within the Army’s four quarterly reports for 2007: 

• In the first quarter, the Army reported on samples ranging from 30 to 50 servicemembers 

who should have completed the PDHRA at eight installations. 

• The second quarter report included information on a sample of 91 servicemembers who 

should have completed the PDHRA at one installation. 

• In its third quarter report, the Army did not include any information on deployment health 

assessments, including PDHRA, citing time constraints, competing events, and personnel 

changes. 

• The fourth quarter report included information on deployment health assessments, except 

for PDHRA, for a sample of 143 servicemembers at one installation. An Army official told 

us that these servicemembers had recently returned from deployment and were not in the 

90 to 180 day time frame for completing the PDHRA. 

Additionally, information included in the quarterly reports varies among the services. For 

example, in contrast to the Army’s quarterly reports, we found that the Air Force did not 

include PDHRA in its quarterly reports for 2007. In its 2008 first quarter report, the Air Force 

reported on the aggregate number—over 50,000—of all of its servicemembers who had 

returned from deployment and should have completed PDHRAs since March 2004. 

Additionally, the military services do not consistently include PDHRA in their quarterly 

reports. For example, 6 of the 16 2007 quarterly reports that we reviewed did not include any 

information on the PDHRA. The absence of such data hampers the department’s ability to 

compare compliance across the military services and within each military service across 

time. The DOD quality assurance program manager told us that she was aware of the 

inconsistencies in the military services’ quarterly reports and said that she does not have the 

authority to enforce the two reporting requirements for the military services’ quarterly 

reports. 

Additionally, AFHSC is required to report monthly to DOD’s quality assurance program on 

servicemembers’ deployment health assessments, including PDHRAs, but as of June 2008, 

these reports did not include all of the information DOD’s quality assurance program needs to 

accurately assess PDHRA completion rates. These reports include the number of 

5 GAO-08-1025R Post-Deployment Health Reassessments
servicemembers who have completed the health assessment. This number is based on the 

number of completed PDHRAs submitted by each military service to AFHSC’s DMSS 

database. As we reported in 2007, DOD does not require AFHSC to report the number of 

servicemembers who should have completed deployment health assessments.15 As a result, 

we recommended in 2007 that DOD provide AFHSC with specific reporting requirements for 

the reports, which would include identifying the total number of servicemembers who 

returned from deployment and who should have completed PDHRAs. In its comments, DOD 

stated that it would work with AFHSC to specify reporting requirements, such as the total 

number of servicemembers who returned from deployment, in order to get a more accurate 

picture of compliance. However, as of June 2008, the department had not specified reporting 

requirements for AFHSC’s reports. 

While the quality assurance program manager does not obtain the total number of 

servicemembers who returned from deployment from AFHSC, the PDHRA program manager 

determines this number using a DOD database. Using this number and the number of 

completed PDHRAs from AFHSC, the PDHRA program manager determines a PDHRA 

completion rate for each service and makes this information available to the DOD quality 

assurance program manager. However, service-wide PDHRA completion rates are not

included in DOD’s quality assurance program’s annual report to DOD and Congress. 

The DOD quality assurance program manager conducts a site visit to one installation per 

service per year to validate whether the information that the military services provide in their 

quarterly reports is correct, but we believe findings from the site visits, as currently 

conducted, should not be used for this purpose.16 During the site visits, servicemembers’ 

medical records are reviewed to determine whether the required deployment health

assessments, including PDHRAs, are in these records. Since the PDHRA is a commander 

program, the implementation can vary from one installation to another within a service, 

depending on an installation’s unique needs and resources. Because of this potential variation 

among installations, DOD’s quality assurance program cannot use one installation as a 

sufficient sample for validation of the information the military services include in their 

quarterly reports. 

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation 

DOD reviewed a draft of this report and provided written comments, which appear in 

enclosure III. Overall, DOD concurred with our report’s findings and conclusions and 

identified several items in the report that DOD addressed in its written comments. 

DOD suggested that oversight can include supervision or management, and consequently, 

this function would be beyond the scope of a quality assurance program. DOD noted that the 

actual management and execution of PDHRAs are the responsibility of commanders and the 

Military Health System. We acknowledge in our report that commanders bear responsibility 

for implementing the program. However, DOD’s quality assurance program is required by 

statute to evaluate the success of DOD’s deployment health assessment system in ensuring 

that servicemembers receive these assessments. PDHRA is one of DOD’s deployment health 

 15GAO-07-831. 

16Site visits are planned, coordinated, and conducted jointly by staff members from DOD’s quality assurance 

program and the services’ medical department. 

6 GAO-08-1025R Post-Deployment Health Reassessments
assessments, and as such, we believe oversight is an important part of evaluating the success 

of the system. 

DOD stated that the key to assessing PDHRA compliance across the services is to ensure that 

the military services provide complete and accurate information to DOD’s enterprisewide 

systems of record. To that end, DOD stated that it is working to develop high quality data 

feeds from the military services to DOD’s databases that contain its systems of record and 

that DOD continues to work on improving the completeness and accuracy of the military 

services’ data. However, DOD did not provide relevant details pertaining to these efforts or 

set a date by which these efforts are to be fully implemented. Therefore, it is essential that 

the quality assurance program receives complete and accurate information from the services 

in their quarterly reports in order to assess PDHRA completion rates and report them to 

decisionmakers. 

Also, DOD stated that site visits are not conducted to validate information provided in the 

services’ quarterly reports, but are intended to allow DOD to understand the military services’ 

operations and to provide staff assistance in a nonthreatening fashion. However, DOD’s 2004 

quality assurance program policy establishes that site visits are intended to complement and 

validate service deployment health quality assurance program reports. Although an additional 

policy of the quality assurance program was issued in 2007, it explicitly states that it expands 

deployment health quality assurance activities pursuant to the 2004 policy. The 2007 policy 

states that periodic on-site visits and reviews may serve as monitoring mechanisms for 

deployment health assessments. We stated in this report that the site visits as currently 

conducted should not be used for validation purposes. As DOD acknowledged, its site visits 

cannot possibly provide the volume of data necessary to validate the information contained 

in the services’ databases. 

DOD pointed out that given the differences of combat and operations among the services, it 

is unlikely that the quarterly reports from each service would ever look the same over time. 

The flexibility afforded to each service in its quarterly reports is noted in this report. 

However, we maintain that each quarterly report should contain consistent information on all 

deployment health assessments that can be used by DOD’s quality assurance program to help 

DOD accurately determine completion rates of deployment health assessments across the 

military services. 

In comments to our June 2007 report, DOD agreed with our recommendation to provide 

specific reporting requirements to the Army Medical Surveillance Activity (AFHSC’s title 

prior to February 2008). DOD has now stated that AFHSC has developed a detailed

compliance methodology using DOD-level data sources, and as a result, there is no need to 

modify AFHSC’s reporting requirements. At the time of our 2008 review, DOD asserted that 

the compliance method was being performed by the PDHRA program manager and not 

through AFHSC, as we noted in this 2008 report. In commenting, DOD did not provide 

relevant details or evidence pertaining to this effort. We maintain that AFHSC’s monthly 

reports to DOD’s quality assurance program should include the information necessary,

including the total number of servicemembers who returned from deployment and should 

have completed PDHRAs, in order for the quality assurance program to accurately assess and 

report PDHRA completion rates to decision makers. 

7 GAO-08-1025R Post-Deployment Health Reassessments
In response to our statement that deployment health assessments are used for surveillance 

purposes, DOD responded that all deployment health assessments are primarily intended to 

maintain or improve servicemembers’ health and incidentally used for surveillance purposes. 

We made changes in our report as appropriate to reflect this. 

- - - - - 

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

congressional committees and addressees. We will also provide copies to others upon 

request. In addition, the 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) 512-7114 

or williamsonr@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 major 

Randall B. Williamson 

contributions to this report are listed in enclosure IV. 

Director, Health Care 

8 GAO-08-1025R Post-Deployment Health Reassessments
List of Congressional Addressees 

The Honorable Carl Levin 

Chairman 

The Honorable John McCain 

Ranking Member 

Committee on Armed Services 

United States Senate 

The Honorable Ike Skelton 

Chairman 

The Honorable Duncan Hunter 

Ranking Member 

Committee on Armed Services 

House of Representatives 

The Honorable Daniel K. Akaka 

United States Senate 

The Honorable Wayne Allard 

United States Senate 

The Honorable Christopher S. Bond

United States Senate 

The Honorable Barbara Boxer 

United States Senate 

The Honorable Tom Harkin 

United States Senate 

The Honorable Joseph I. Lieberman 

United States Senate 

The Honorable Claire McCaskill 

United States Senate 

The Honorable Patty Murray 

United States Senate 

The Honorable Barack Obama 

United States Senate 

The Honorable Ken Salazar 

United States Senate 

The Honorable Bernard Sanders 

United States Senate 

9 GAO-08-1025R Post-Deployment Health Reassessments 
Enclosure I: Timing and Purpose of DOD Deployment-Based Health Assessments

DOD Deployment-Based Health Assessments 

Name Purpose and description Timing

Pre-deployment

health assessment 

• To record general information about servicemembers’ 

health to identify any health concerns that may need to 

be addressed prior to deployment and can be used for 

surveillance purposes. 

• A health care provider is to review the pre-deployment 

health assessment, which is completed by 

servicemembers. If the provider identifies any health 

concerns that may affect servicemembers’ ability to 

deploy, the provider may refer servicemembers for a 

further evaluation. 

• Required by the National Defense Authorization Act for 

Fiscal Year 1998.a

 

Within 60 days prior to 

deployment 

Post-deployment 

health assessment 

(PDHA) 

• To identify and refer servicemembers with health 

concerns as a result of deployment. 

• A health care provider is to review the PDHA, which is 

completed by servicemembers and conduct an interview 

to discuss any deployment-related health concerns, 

including mental health concerns, with servicemembers. 

If necessary, the provider may refer servicemembers for 

further evaluation. 

• Required by the National Defense Authorization Act for 

Fiscal Year 1998.a

 

Within 30 days before or 

30 days after return from 

deployment 

Post-deployment 

health 

reassessment 

(PDHRA) 

• To focus on servicemembers’ health concerns that 

emerge over time after return from deployment. 

• A health care provider is to review the completed 

PDHRA, which is completed by servicemembers, and if 

necessary conduct an interview to discuss any 

deployment-related health concerns, including mental

health concerns, with servicemembers. If necessary, the 

provider may refer servicemembers for further 

evaluation. 

• Initiated by DOD in 2005. 

Within 90 to 180 days after 

return from deployment 

Source: DOD. 

a

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998, Pub. L. No. 105-85, § 765(a)(1), 111 Stat. 1629, 1826 (1997) 

(codified as amended at 10 U.S.C. § 1074f). 

10 GAO-08-1025R Post-Deployment Health Reassessments 
Enclosure II: Sample Post-Deployment Health Reassessment Form 

11 GAO-08-1025R Post-Deployment Health Reassessments 
Enclosure II: Sample Post-Deployment Health Reassessment Form 

12 GAO-08-1025R Post-Deployment Health Reassessments
Enclosure II: Sample Post-Deployment Health Reassessment Form 

13 GAO-08-1025R Post-Deployment Health Reassessments
Enclosure II: Sample Post-Deployment Health Reassessment Form 

14 GAO-08-1025R Post-Deployment Health Reassessments
Enclosure II: Sample Post-Deployment Health Reassessment Form 

15 GAO-08-1025R Post-Deployment Health Reassessments
Enclosure III 

Comments from the Department of Defense 

16 GAO-08-1025R Post-Deployment Health Reassessments 
Enclosure III

17 GAO-08-1025R Post-Deployment Health Reassessments
Enclosure IV 

GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments 

GAO Contact 

Randall B. Williamson, (202) 512-7114 or williamsonr@gao.gov

Acknowledgments 

In addition to the contact named above, Mary Ann Curran, Assistant Director; Martha Fisher; 

Drew Long; Jasleen Modi; Lisa Motley; and Samantha Poppe made key contributions to this 

report. 

(290686) 

18 GAO-08-1025R Post-Deployment Health Reassessments 
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. The published product 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. 
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 “E-mail Updates.” 

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony 

Order by Mail or Phone 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, DC 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 

Ralph Dawn, Managing Director, dawnr@gao.gov, (202) 512-4400 

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125 

Washington, DC 20548 

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs 

Congressional 

Relations 

Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov, (202) 512-4800 

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, DC 20548 

Public Affairs 

PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER