**GAO-10-751R**                      Published: Jul 12, 2010. Publicly Released: Jul 12, 2010.                  

-   
-   
-   
-   

    Jump To:  
-  Elder Abuse 
-  Services for Older Adults 
-  State and Local-Level Drivers and Trends 
-  State and Local Fiscal Projections 
-  Federal Borrowing 
-  Managing the Debt 
-  Summary of Funding Provisions 
-  Auditing the Government's Books 
-  Unpacking the Financial Report 
-  Highlights 
-  Recommendations 
-  Background 
-  About This Work 
-  About This Work 
-  Trends 
-  About the Center 
-  Why It's High Risk 
-  What Remains To Be Done 
-  Key Reports 
-  Newest COVID-Related Reports 
-  AI Use Cases 
-  Flood Insurance 
-  Past Pandemic-Related Reports 
-  CARES Act Oversight Reports 
-  All COVID-19 Reports 
-  Report Suspected Fraud 
-  Subjects 
-  How to Get Notified 
-  Past Reports 
-  Public Health Threats 
-  Explore the FY 2022 and 2023 Funds 
-  Lessons Learned 
-  Agency Reports 
-  Recent Reports 
-  Recommendations 
-  Supplemental Material 
-  Full Report 
-  Additional Data 
-  View Decision 
-  Downloads 
-  Previously Identified Actions 
-  Related Pages 
-  Associated Agencies 
-  Tough Choices and Opportunities Ahead 
-  Americas Fiscal Future Key Areas 
-  Retirement Security Key Areas 
-  Current List 
-  About The High Risk List 
-  Area Ratings 
-  Previous High Risk Products 
-  Search Federal Vacancies 
-  Past Federal Vacancies 
-  Violation Letters 
-  About the Yellow Book 
-  Advisory Council 
-  Related Resources 
-  Comment Letters 
-  Related Publications 
-  Contacts and Resources 
-  Major Issues Facing the Nation 
-  Meeting Strategic Challenges 
-  Additional Resources 
-  Resources 
-  GAO Contacts 
-  Mission Teams 
-  Operations and Staff Offices  
-  Organization Chart  
-  Why a Career at GAO? 
-  Am I Qualified? 
-  Company Culture 
-  Reasonable Accommodations 
-  Video Gallery 
-  Paid Internships 
-  Student Volunteers 
-  Professional Development Program 
-  Advancement 
-  Executive Candidate Program 
-  Summer Associates 
-  Externships 
-  Benefits 
-  Contacts 

Skip to Highlights

## Highlights

The Defense Manpower Data Center (DMDC) conducts a series of Web-based surveys called Status of Forces surveys, which help enable decision makers within the Department of Defense (DOD) to (1) evaluate existing programs and policies, (2) establish baselines before implementing new programs and policies, and (3) monitor the progress of programs and policies and their effects on the total force. In recent years, we have discussed the results of these surveys in several of our reports. While we have generally found the survey results to be sufficiently reliable for the purposes of our reporting, several of our reports have discussed low response rates and the potential for bias in the survey results. Nonresponse analysis is an established practice in survey research that helps determine whether nonresponse bias (i.e., survey results that do not accurately reflect the population) might occur due to under- or overrepresentation of some respondents' views on survey questions. When nonresponse analysis is performed, survey researchers can use the results to select and adjust the statistical weighting techniques they use that help ensure that survey results accurately reflect the survey population. Because we have noted, in reports referring to the Status of Forces surveys, the potential for bias and because of DMDC's role in supporting DOD decision making, we initiated this review under the Comptroller General's statutory authority to conduct evaluations on his own initiative. Specifically, our objective was to determine the extent to which DMDC performs nonresponse analysis of the results of its Status of Forces surveys to determine whether reported results of respondents' views might be under- or overrepresented. To address our objective, a team that included GAO social science analysts with survey research expertise and GAO's Chief Statistician (1) reviewed relevant documentation provided by DMDC regarding the survey methods used for the Status of Forces surveys, (2) interviewed DMDC survey officials who had knowledge of or were involved in the development and administration of the surveys, and (3) reviewed the response rates for the Status of Forces surveys conducted since 2003. We conducted this performance audit between November 2009 and May 2010 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 obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives.

## Recommendations

## Recommendations for Executive Action

## Full Report

Full Report (11 pages)

Accessible Text 

## GAO Contacts

Brenda S. Farrell
FarrellB@gao.gov

(202) 512-3604

## Office of Public Affairs

Sarah Kaczmarek
kaczmareks@gao.gov

(202) 512-4800

## Topics

Human Capital

Data collectionHuman capital managementHuman capital planningMilitary personnelMonitoringPolicy evaluationProgram evaluationReporting requirementsReports managementStatistical dataStatistical methodsSurveysPolicies and procedures