a

GAO

United States Government Accountability Office

Report to Congressional Committees

September 2005 DEFENSE SPACE 

ACTIVITIES

Management 

Guidance and 

Performance 

Measures Needed to 

Develop Personnel

GAO-05-833
What GAO Found

United States Government Accountability Office

Why GAO Did This Study

Highlights

Accountability Integrity Reliability

www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-05-833.

To view the full product, including the scope 

and methodology, click on the link above. 

For more information, contact Davi D'Agostino

at (202) 512-5431 or dagostinod@gao.gov. 

Highlights of GAO-05-833, a report to 

congressional committees 

September 2005

DEFENSE SPACE ACTIVITIES 

Management Guidance and Performance 

Measures Needed to Develop Personnel 

Since a January 2001 Space Commission report highlighted the need to 

develop and maintain a space cadre, DOD has made limited progress on 

defensewide space cadre actions. DOD has fallen behind its implementation 

schedule for its February 2004 space human capital strategy. DOD’s strategy 

implementation plan identified tasks on space personnel management, 

education and training, and critical positions. As of June 2005, DOD had 

completed three of the nine tasks scheduled for completion by March 2005 

and one other task. Space cadre leadership has not always been proactive 

because the Executive Agent gave the space cadre a low priority due to 

competing demands and then made it a higher priority in 2004. The 

Executive Agent’s departure in March 2005 also delayed some of the tasks. 

In addition, delays were caused by the need to build consensus among the 

services on space cadre actions and to make changes in a large organization.

DOD’s management approach for the departmentwide space cadre is 

inconsistent with a results-oriented management approach in two areas. 

First, DOD has not issued detailed guidance to provide accountability by 

institutionalizing space cadre authorities and responsibilities. The strategy 

provides general space cadre responsibilities for the Executive Agent and 

the services. DOD has not determined specific defensewide space cadre 

responsibilities that should continue because DOD has not completed its 

strategy implementation. Without defensewide guidance, progress may not 

continue and DOD may not develop enough space-qualified professionals. 

Second, DOD does not have performance measures and an evaluation plan 

to assess progress. The services provided space cadre information to DOD, 

but not performance measures linked to goals, such as education levels and 

promotion rates. Without performance measures and a plan to evaluate 

progress, the Executive Agent, the Secretary of Defense, and Congress may 

not be able to monitor the services’ progress in meeting their goals. 

In the absence of continuous proactive defensewide space cadre leadership, 

the military services’ progress in planning and completing space cadre 

initiatives has varied since GAO’s August 2004 report. The services are 

pursuing separate initiatives to address the unique needs of their particular 

service and these are in various stages of completion. Without proactive 

DOD leadership, the Secretary of Defense and Congress will not have 

assurance that the services are obtaining and developing the space cadre the 

nation needs. The Air Force, which is DOD’s largest acquirer and operator of 

space systems and has the largest space cadre, has continued to implement 

its space professional strategy and has a permanent organizational focal 

point. The Navy published its space cadre strategy and established a 

permanent organizational focal point. The Army is conducting an analysis to 

determine its future space cadre actions, which could lead to a space cadre 

strategy and a permanent organizational focal point. The Marine Corps, 

which has a space cadre strategy and a permanent organizational focal point, 

continues to implement the initiatives contained in its strategy. 

The Department of Defense (DOD) 

employs space to support critical 

military capabilities and funding for 

space is about 5.4 percent of DOD’s 

budget. In 2001, the Space 

Commission noted that DOD needs 

a force composed of educated, 

motivated, and competent 

personnel, but DOD was not yet on 

course to develop the space cadre 

the nation needs. DOD has a 

defensewide space human capital 

strategy and implementation plan 

and an Executive Agent for Space 

responsible for space planning, 

programming, and acquisitions. 

Congress required two GAO 

reports assessing DOD’s strategy 

and the military services’ efforts to 

develop their space personnel. 

GAO’s first report was issued in 

August 2004. In its second report, 

GAO (1) determined DOD’s 

progress in implementing 

defensewide space cadre actions, 

(2) assessed if DOD’s space cadre 

management approach is 

consistent with a results-oriented 

management approach, and 

(3) determined the progress the 

services have made in planning and 

completing space cadre initiatives. 

What GAO Recommends

GAO is making recommendations 

designed to institutionalize DOD 

space cadre authorities, 

responsibilities, and structure and 

to help DOD measure and evaluate 

its space cadre actions. In its 

comments, DOD agreed with these 

recommendations. 
Page i GAO-05-833 Defense Space Activities 

Letter 1

Results in Brief 3 

Background 6 

DOD Has Made Limited Progress in Integrating and Developing Its 

Space Cadre 9 

DOD’s Space Cadre Management Approach Is Incomplete 13 

Services’ Progress on Space Cadre Development Initiatives Varies 17 

Conclusions 23 

Recommendations for Executive Action 24 

Agency Comments 24 

Appendix I Scope and Methodology 26 

Appendix II Comments from the Department of Defense 28 

Appendix III GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments 30 

Tables 

Table 1: DOD Crosscutting Space Budget for Fiscal Year 2006 7 

Table 2: Status of Selected Tasks in DOD Strategy Implementation 

Plan 11 

Table 3: DOD Space Personnel by Service as of March 2005 18 

Table 4: DOD Space Positions by Service as of March 2005 19 

Figures 

Figure 1: Number of DOD Space Personnel by Military Service 8 

Figure 2: Timeline of Key Management Milestones Related to 

 Defensewide Space Cadre Development 9 

Contents 
Page ii GAO-05-833 Defense Space Activities 

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 1 GAO-05-833 Defense Space Activities 

September 21, 2005 

The Honorable John W. Warner 

Chairman 

The Honorable Carl Levin 

Ranking Minority Member 

Committee on Armed Services 

United States Senate 

The Honorable Duncan L. Hunter 

Chairman 

The Honorable Ike Skelton 

Ranking Minority Member 

Committee on Armed Services 

House of Representatives 

The Department of Defense (DOD) employs space assets to support many 

critical military capabilities including intelligence collection; battlefield 

surveillance and management; global command, control, and 

communications; and navigation assistance. Sufficient numbers of spacequalified personnel are central to DOD’s success in space. Due to concerns 

about the DOD’s organization and management of space activities, 

Congress chartered the Commission to Assess United States National 

Security Space Management and Organization (Space Commission) in 

1999 to review the organization and management of national security 

space activities. In its January 2001 report, the Space Commission 

identified some long-standing management challenges, including 

developing and maintaining a cadre of space professionals to assume 

leadership roles in all aspects of space-related activities. The Space 

Commission noted that DOD needs a total force composed of welleducated, motivated, and competent personnel to assign to military 

service, joint, and interagency positions to work on space operations, 

requirements, and acquisition, but that DOD was not yet on course to 

develop the space cadre the nation needs. The commission stated that 

DOD must place a high priority on intensifying investments in space career 

development, education, and training to develop and sustain a highly 

competent and motivated space cadre. According to the Secretary of 

Defense’s memo implementing the commission’s recommendations, the 

military services are responsible for developing and maintaining sufficient 

quantities of space-qualified personnel. 

United States Government Accountability Office

Washington, DC 20548 
Page 2 GAO-05-833 Defense Space Activities 

DOD issued a directive in June 2003 that established an Executive Agent 

for Space. The DOD directive stipulates that the Executive Agent shall 

develop, coordinate, and integrate plans and programs for space systems 

and the acquisition of space major defense acquisition programs to 

provide operational space force capabilities to ensure the United States 

has the space power to achieve its national security objectives. Many DOD 

components are involved in defense space activities and the budget 

request for the space program is about $22.7 billion, or about 5.4 percent 

of DOD’s total budget for fiscal year 2006. The Air Force is DOD’s largest 

developer, procurer, and operator of space systems; has the largest space 

cadre of all the services; and has about 92.6 percent of the fiscal year 2006 

space budget request. 

In the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002, Congress 

mandated that we provide an assessment of the actions taken by the 

Secretary of Defense in implementing the Space Commission’s 

recommendations. In April 2003, we recommended that DOD establish a 

departmentwide space human capital strategy to guide its activities to 

develop its cadre of space professionals. DOD issued its space human 

capital strategy in February 2004. This strategy established direction for 

the future and included goals and objectives for developing and integrating 

space personnel. The strategy also identified key actions to meet the 

objectives, which were to be implemented in three phases. 

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

mandated that we submit two reports assessing DOD’s space human 

capital strategy and the efforts by the military departments to develop 

their space personnel. In our first report of August 2004, we found that 

DOD lacked a complete management approach for implementing its space 

human capital strategy and that the military services varied in the extent to 

which they had identified and implemented initiatives to develop and 

manage their space cadres. We noted that DOD had not implemented the 

strategy’s actions, and we recommended that DOD develop an 

implementation plan for its strategy. We also noted that the Air Force and 

Marine Corps had space cadre strategies and focal points for managing 

their space personnel, but that the Army and Navy did not, and we 

recommended that the Army and Navy develop strategies and establish 

focal points. 

Our objectives for this second report in response to the mandate were to 

(1) determine the progress DOD has made in implementing the 

defensewide actions contained in its February 2004 space human capital 

strategy to integrate and develop its space cadre, (2) assess if DOD’s 
Page 3 GAO-05-833 Defense Space Activities 

management approach for the departmentwide space cadre is consistent 

with a results-oriented management approach, and (3) determine the 

progress the services have made since our August 2004 report in planning 

and completing initiatives to develop and manage their space cadres. To 

determine the progress DOD has made in implementing the defensewide 

actions contained in the strategy, we reviewed and analyzed the DOD 

space human capital strategy and its implementation plan and discussed 

and documented the status of implementing actions with DOD and service 

personnel. To assess DOD’s management approach for the 

departmentwide space cadre, we compared DOD’s management approach 

with a results-oriented management approach and reviewed DOD’s space 

cadre guidance. To determine the progress the services have made in 

planning and completing space cadre initiatives since our August 2004 

report, we obtained and reviewed information on the services’ initiatives 

and we collected and analyzed data on space positions and personnel. We 

conducted our review from September 2004 through June 2005 in 

accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. More 

detailed information on our scope and methodology is provided in 

appendix I. 

Since the January 2001 Space Commission report highlighted DOD’s need 

to develop and maintain a space cadre, DOD has made limited progress on 

departmentwide space cadre actions. DOD has fallen behind its planned 

schedule for implementing the February 2004 space human capital 

strategy. In December 2004, DOD issued an implementation plan for its 

strategy that identified 30 tasks related to space personnel management, 

education and training, and critical space positions. Most of these tasks 

were scheduled to be completed by November 2005, and some had 

completion dates that were not determined. Nine tasks were scheduled for 

completion by March 2005. As of June 2005, DOD had completed only 3 of 

these 9 tasks, as well as 1 other task that did not have an estimated 

completion date. DOD has not completed 6 of the 9 tasks scheduled for 

completion in March 2005, although it has taken actions on some of them. 

Progress on defensewide space cadre actions has been delayed for two 

reasons. First, defensewide space cadre leadership has not always been 

proactive because the DOD Executive Agent for Space had varying 

management priorities and departed in March 2005, which contributed to 

delays in implementing the space human capital strategy. Implementation 

of defensewide space cadre actions was initially not one of the highest 

priorities of the Executive Agent, who concentrated on addressing issues 

related to major space acquisition programs; however, in 2004, the 

Executive Agent made the space cadre a higher priority. Second, DOD 

Results in Brief 
Page 4 GAO-05-833 Defense Space Activities 

officials attributed delays to challenges, such as the need to build 

consensus on defensewide space cadre actions among the services, which 

have differing space roles and cultures, and the difficulties in making 

timely changes in large organizations. 

Although DOD has developed a space human capital strategy and 

implementation plan to address space cadre issues, DOD’s management 

approach for the departmentwide space cadre is inconsistent with a 

results-oriented management approach in two areas. First, DOD has not 

issued detailed defensewide guidance for providing accountability by 

institutionalizing space cadre authorities and responsibilities of the 

Executive Agent and the services and by requiring specific human capital 

development and management structure and functions. The DOD directive 

that created the Executive Agent in June 2003 did not define the Executive 

Agent’s specific authority and responsibilities related to the defensewide 

space cadre. Hence, there is no defensewide accountability for developing 

the space cadre that was called for by the Space Commission. Although 

the space human capital strategy assigns general responsibilities to DOD 

components, DOD has not determined the specific space cadre 

management responsibilities and structure that should continue over time 

because DOD has not completed implementing its strategy. Until DOD 

completes its strategy implementation, it will not be in the best position to 

determine the optimal management structure and processes. Without 

detailed DOD guidance to determine space cadre management 

responsibilities and structure, the progress made on improvements to the 

defensewide space cadre may not continue, and DOD may not develop 

enough space professionals with the necessary training, education, and 

experience to advance the use of space power and transform military 

operations. Second, DOD does not have performance measures and an 

evaluation plan to indicate results related to goals that could be used by 

the Executive Agent to help evaluate DOD’s progress in integrating and 

developing space personnel over time. One objective of DOD’s human 

capital strategy is to collect the data necessary to manage space personnel 

and the strategy implementation plan called for an evaluation plan to 

compare the results to goals. The Executive Agent has not provided 

leadership by developing services’ space cadre performance measures in 

conjunction with the services. Instead, the Executive Agent has deferred 

to the services because, according to DOD officials, the differences among 

the services’ space activities make uniform performance measures 

inappropriate. However, we observe that the Executive Agent and the 

services could work together to develop defensewide performance 

measures. Although some performance measures could be the same 

across the services, others may need to be tailored for service-unique 
Page 5 GAO-05-833 Defense Space Activities 

situations. Even though the services have provided information on their 

space cadres to the Executive Agent, they have not provided performance 

measures linked to goals. Without such performance measures and a plan 

to evaluate progress, the Executive Agent does not have indicators that 

would show if the services’ space cadre activities are appropriately 

synchronized. As a result, the Executive Agent, the Secretary of Defense, 

and Congress may not be able to monitor the services’ progress in meeting 

their goals. 

In the absence of continuous proactive defensewide space cadre 

leadership, the services’ progress in planning and completing their 

initiatives to develop and manage their own space cadres has varied since 

our August 2004 report. The Space Commission identified the need for 

DOD to develop space leaders for the future through focused career 

development, education, and training because DOD was not yet on course 

to develop the space cadre the nation needed. The services are pursuing 

their own separate initiatives to address the unique needs of their 

particular service and these are in various stages of completion. Without 

proactive DOD leadership and oversight with regard to the services’ 

initiatives, neither the Secretary of Defense nor Congress will have the 

assurance that the services are obtaining and developing the space cadre 

that was called for by the Space Commission. Each service continues to 

identify the members of its space cadre, but the Air Force is the only one 

to have formally included enlisted personnel as space cadre members and 

has begun to identify civilian space cadre members. The Air Force, which 

has a space human capital strategy and space cadre management focal 

point, recently issued a space professional career guide providing 

guidance to space personnel on career development and paths, and 

established space experience codes for use in assigning personnel to 

space positions. The Air Force has also been working on personnel 

certification to indicate the depth of space expertise and is planning to 

issue a policy document to require continuing management of its space 

cadre. The Navy issued its space human capital strategy in January 2005 

and established an organizational focal point for its space cadre in May 

2005. The Navy also budgeted funds for the first time to support space 

cadre management, contractor support, and training. The Army has had a 

program for its space operations officers since 1999, but it does not have 

an approved space cadre strategy or a permanent organizational focal 

point for space cadre management. However, the Army is conducting an 

analysis of its space personnel, which it expects to complete in September 

2005, that will recommend future courses of action and alternatives for a 

space cadre management office. The Marine Corps, which has a strategy 

and focal point, continues to implement its strategy’s initiatives, such as 
Page 6 GAO-05-833 Defense Space Activities 

developing education and training requirements for its space cadre and an 

implementation policy to delineate space roles and responsibilities. 

We are making recommendations designed to provide accountability by 

defining and institutionalizing space cadre management responsibilities 

and structure and to help DOD better monitor and evaluate the actions it 

has taken to integrate and develop its space cadre. In commenting on a 

draft of this report, DOD agreed with these recommendations. 

Many DOD components are involved in a variety of space activities. The 

U.S. Strategic Command, one of DOD’s joint combatant commands, is 

responsible for the space and global strike mission, and it establishes 

overall operational requirements for space activities. The services provide 

support to the U.S. Strategic Command to meet these requirements. The 

Air Force Space Command is the principal service command providing 

space forces for the U.S. Strategic Command. The Air Force is DOD’s 

primary procurer and operator of space systems that are used by others 

throughout DOD. The Navy operates space systems that contribute to ultra 

high frequency communications and is responsible for acquiring the 

Mobile User Operations System, the next generation of ultra high 

frequency satellite communication systems. The Army controls a defense 

satellite communications system and operates ground mobile terminals. 

The Army Space and Missile Defense Command conducts space 

operations and provides planning, integration, and control and 

coordination of Army forces and capabilities. In the case of the Marine 

Corps, space capabilities provide the warfighter with intelligence, 

communications, and position navigation. The Office of the Secretary of 

Defense, the Joint Staff, the National Reconnaissance Office, and various 

other DOD components also participate in space activities. 

Space activities are a significant part of the DOD budget each year. To 

capture the funding for DOD’s space activities, DOD established a virtual 

(or crosscutting) major force program for space in its Future Years 

Defense Program. The space program budget request comprises about 5.4 

percent of DOD’s total funding, or approximately $22.7 billion for fiscal 

year 2006. The majority of the space funding program is allocated to 

acquisition of space systems, including $11.0 billion for research, 

development, test, and evaluation and $7.8 billion for procurement. 

Funding for space military personnel is about $1.1 billion, or about 5 

percent of the total for the space program. As table 1 shows, the Air Force 

receives approximately $20.1 billion, which is about 92.6 percent of the 

funding in the space program. The rest is divided among the Department 

Background 
Page 7 GAO-05-833 Defense Space Activities 

of the Army, the Department of the Navy (Navy and Marine Corps), and 

other defense components. 

Table 1: DOD Crosscutting Space Budget for Fiscal Year 2006 

Dollars in millions 

By DOD component 

Air Force $20,992

Navy $916

Army $413

Other defense $342

Total $22,663

By budget title 

Military Personnel $1,124

Operation & Maintenance $2,684

Procurement $7,824

Research, Development, Test, Evaluation $10,965

Military Construction $66

Total $22,663

Source: DOD’s Fiscal Year 2006 Future Years Defense Program, May 2005. 

Due to continuing concerns about DOD’s management of space activities, 

in October 1999 Congress chartered the Commission to Assess United 

States National Security Space Management and Organization. In its 

January 2001 report, the commission unanimously concluded that the 

security and well-being of the United States, its allies, and friends depend 

on the nation’s ability to operate in space. The commission made 

recommendations to DOD to improve coordination, execution, and 

oversight of the department’s space activities. One issue that the 

commission identified was the need to create and maintain a highly 

trained and experienced cadre of space professionals who could master 

highly complex technology, as well as develop new space operations 

concepts. Further, the commission concluded that DOD did not have a 

strong military space culture, which included focused career development, 

education, and training. In October 2001, the Secretary of Defense directed 

the military departments to promulgate guidance for developing and 

maintaining a cadre of sufficient numbers of space-qualified professionals. 

As shown in figure 1, the services have identified a total of about 8,200 

space personnel with space experience, education, and training 

throughout DOD, with the Air Force having 91 percent of the total or 7,434 

space personnel. 
Page 8 GAO-05-833 Defense Space Activities 

Figure 1: Number of DOD Space Personnel by Military Service 

The Space Commission also considered several options for the 

management and organization of national security space. The commission 

recommended the establishment of an Under Secretary of Defense for 

Space, Intelligence, and Information, who would provide policy, guidance, 

and oversight for space in order to help ensure that space-related issues 

are addressed in the department at an appropriately influential level. 

Instead of creating an Under Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of 

Defense chose to address this organizational and leadership issue with 

alternative actions. In June 2003, a DOD directive designated the Secretary 

of the Air Force as the DOD Executive Agent for Space, with the Executive 

Agent responsibilities delegated to the Under Secretary of the Air Force. 

Until recently, the Under Secretary of the Air Force also served as the 

Director of the National Reconnaissance Office, which is a DOD 

intelligence agency that designs, builds, and operates the nation’s 

reconnaissance satellites, in addition to serving as the Executive Agent for 

Space. The Executive Agent exercises DOD-wide responsibilities for 

planning and programming of space activities and for space major defense 

acquisitions programs. In performing these responsibilities, the Executive 

Source: GAO analysis of data provided by the military services.

91%

6%

2%

Army

(156)

Navy

(511)

1%

Marine Corps

(110)

Air Force

(7,434)
Page 9 GAO-05-833 Defense Space Activities 

Agent reports to the Secretary and Deputy Secretary of Defense and is 

subject to the authority, direction, and control of the Secretary of Defense, 

according to the DOD directive. However, the directive contains no 

specific provisions related to the Executive Agent’s role and 

responsibilities for the defensewide space cadre. Title 10 of the United 

States Code provides the secretaries of the military departments with 

functions related to their personnel, including recruiting, organizing, 

training, and maintaining. As a result, the Executive Agent works with the 

services on developing their space cadres and addresses DOD-wide issues 

related to the space cadre, according to an Office of the Secretary of 

Defense official. DOD has established a structure of groups to oversee and 

conduct defensewide space cadre development activities, including the 

Space Professional Oversight Board, which is composed of the Executive 

Agent and senior leadership from the services and other DOD 

components. 

Since the January 2001 Space Commission report highlighted DOD’s need 

to develop and maintain a space cadre, DOD has made limited progress on 

departmentwide space cadre actions. DOD has fallen behind its planned 

schedule for implementing the February 2004 space human capital 

strategy. DOD’s space human capital strategy established direction for the 

future by including goals and objectives for developing and integrating 

space personnel. DOD’s plan to implement the strategy included specific 

tasks related to departmentwide space personnel management, education 

and training, and critical positions. As of June 2005, DOD had completed 

three of the nine tasks scheduled for completion by March 2005 and had 

taken actions on some of the others. The dates of key management 

milestones related to the development of the defensewide space cadre are 

shown in figure 2. 

Figure 2: Timeline of Key Management Milestones Related to Defensewide Space 

Cadre Development 

DOD Has Made 

Limited Progress in 

Integrating and 

Developing Its Space 

Cadre 

Source: GAO analysis.

2001

January 2001:

Space Commission

issues report

June 2003:

DOD establishes

Executive Agent

for Space

February 2004:

DOD issues

space human

capital strategy

December 2004:

DOD issues

implementation

plan for strategy

2002 2003 2004 2005
Page 10 GAO-05-833 Defense Space Activities 

Although the Space Commission expressed concerns about DOD’s space 

cadre in its January 2001 report, DOD did not have a defensewide strategy 

to develop and integrate its space cadre. In our April 2003 report, we 

reported that the services had produced initial guidance on developing and 

managing their own space professionals as directed by the Secretary of 

Defense, and recommended that a departmentwide space human capital 

strategy be established. According to DOD’s February 2004 strategy, key 

actions to address the strategy’s objectives were all scheduled to be 

completed by December 2004, except for a few that were to recur each 

year. As of our August 2004 report, none of these actions had been 

completed, although DOD had begun implementing some of them. Actions 

that were under way at that time included: 

• preparing for an education and training summit; 

• evaluating space cadre best practices; 

• developing policy on human capital development and use; 

• determining the scope, nature, and specialties associated with space 

personnel certification; and 

• issuing a call for demonstration projects. 

In our August 2004 report, we recommended that DOD develop a detailed 

implementation plan for the key actions in its strategy. In December 2004, 

DOD issued its implementation plan for the space human capital strategy. 

A number of the plan’s tasks are the same or similar to the key actions 

called for in the space human capital strategy. However, the plan’s tasks 

were more specific than the strategy’s actions, and each task included the 

offices responsible, estimated completion date, and whether they were 

recurring. Many of the tasks were scheduled to be completed by 

November 2005, and a few did not have estimated completion dates. As a 

result, the implementation of the strategy was extended by almost 1 year 

when the implementation plan’s tasks replaced the strategy’s actions. 

The implementation plan contained 30 tasks that were grouped into three 

broad areas: management, education and training, and space critical 

positions. Management tasks were intended to develop a DOD-wide 

assessment and oversight function that would provide feedback to the 

services on their compliance with the strategy. These tasks included 

developing an evaluation plan to assess the status of the space cadre and a 

DOD instruction on management of the space professional development 

program. The tasks for education and training included recommending 

actions needed to correct overlaps and gaps in space education and 

training across the services, improving space-related professional military 

education, and creating educational opportunities to fulfill requirements. 
Page 11 GAO-05-833 Defense Space Activities 

Most of the tasks in the implementation plan relate to the space critical 

positions that are outside the military services, such as in joint, defense 

agency, or multiservice organizations. These tasks are directed toward 

developing an inventory of space critical positions that would have 

specific requirements for the personnel assigned to them. These 

implementation plan tasks were designed to lead to a DOD space critical 

position program to help manage these positions and the assignment of 

personnel to them. 

DOD has begun to implement the tasks in its implementation plan, but it 

has not met the scheduled completion dates for all nine tasks scheduled to 

be completed by March 2005. As of June 2005, three of these nine tasks 

were completed on schedule and one other task, which did not have an 

estimated completion date, was also completed. Table 2 below shows the 

status of these implementation plan tasks. 

Table 2: Status of Selected Tasks in DOD Strategy Implementation Plan 

Tasks Status 

Management 

Services brief the Space Professional Oversight Board on 

development efforts and activities 

Completed 

Develop an evaluation plan for space professional development Not completed 

Education and training 

Hold education and training summita Completed 

Evaluate current space-related professional military education and 

recommend adjustments as needed 

Not completed 

Determine which educational and training programs are applicable 

for communitywide use 

Not completed 

Identify existing curricula, course materials, and classes Not completed 

Critical positions 

Create a baseline proposal for space critical positions Completed 

Identify where space personnel are at the DOD-wide level Completed 

Identify where space personnel should be at the DOD-wide level Not completed 

Identify space critical positions Not completed 

Source: GAO’s analysis of DOD information. 

a

In the DOD strategy implementation plan, this task has a completion date to be determined. DOD 

held an education and training summit in October 2004. 

The six uncompleted tasks were not completed as planned for various 

reasons. Rather than develop a defensewide evaluation plan, the Executive 

Agent deferred the responsibility for space cadre evaluation to the 
Page 12 GAO-05-833 Defense Space Activities 

services. The space-related professional military education task has been 

delayed because the Military Education Coordination Council, which is an 

advisory body to the Director of the Joint Staff on education issues, did 

not select space as a special area of emphasis for this year. The Executive 

Agent is still working on the task of determining which educational and 

training programs are applicable for communitywide use and identifying 

existing curricula, course materials, and classes. The Executive Agent has 

not completed the task of identifying where space personnel should be at 

the DOD-wide level because it has not yet issued a tasking to DOD 

components to provide this information. The Executive Agent has not 

completed the identification of space critical positions because this task 

depends on DOD components’ providing the information called for in the 

previous task. 

Defensewide space cadre leadership has not always been proactive, which 

has contributed to delays in implementing the space human capital 

strategy. Delays were partly caused by the fact that the Executive Agent 

gave space cadre development a low priority. In December 2002, the 

Executive Agent stated that he needed to devote more attention to space 

cadre development because his first priority had been to address issues 

related to major space acquisition programs. No defensewide space cadre 

actions were taken during this time. In June 2004, the Executive Agent 

stated that the space cadre was a higher priority item for him now due to 

the importance of space and the growth of the space cadre. He also stated 

that he thought that good progress had been made in developing the DOD 

space cadre. In 2004, DOD developed the space human capital strategy and 

its implementation plan. In addition, the departure of the Executive Agent 

in March 2005 caused actions related to some of the implementation plan’s 

tasks to be delayed, such as tasking DOD components to provide 

information on where their space positions should be at the DOD-wide 

level. 

Delays in implementing the human capital strategy on schedule have also 

been due partly to challenges in achieving consensus on defensewide 

space cadre actions, according to DOD officials. Specifically, one 

challenge is the need for all of the services and other appropriate 

organizations within DOD to concur with any defensewide changes related 

to space cadre development activities. Reaching consensus can be difficult 

because of the differing space roles and cultures of the services. For 

example, the Air Force views space as a warfighting medium and thinks in 

terms of space power. The Air Force has by far the most major space 

programs and is the only service with extensive space operations, such as 

space launch, space control, and satellite systems. The other services tend 
Page 13 GAO-05-833 Defense Space Activities 

to view space as a force enhancer because they are primarily users of 

space to support their missions. Another challenge is the difficulty 

inherent in making timely changes in a large organization such as DOD. 

Although DOD has developed a space human capital strategy and 

implementation plan to address space cadre issues, DOD’s management 

approach for the departmentwide space cadre is inconsistent with a 

results-oriented management approach in two areas. First, there is no 

detailed DOD guidance for providing accountability by institutionalizing 

space cadre responsibilities and establishing a structure for a board and 

working groups to ensure that space cadre development and management 

functions continue to be performed. Second, DOD has not developed 

performance measures and an evaluation plan that DOD and Congress 

could use to assess space cadre professional development. As a result of 

the lack of a complete management approach, DOD may not be able to 

fully address the concern of the Space Commission that it lacked a strong 

military space culture that includes focused career development and 

education and training. 

DOD has not issued detailed guidance to institutionalize DOD’s space 

cadre authority and responsibilities to ensure accountability for space 

cadre development and management functions to be performed on a 

continuous basis by the Executive Agent, the services, and other 

appropriate DOD components. Such detailed guidance could include 

specific authority and responsibilities for the Executive Agent and the 

services on space cadre management and oversight, education and 

training, and space critical positions, as well as a structure for multiservice 

organizational entities to carry out these space cadre responsibilities. 

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.1

 The June 2003 DOD directive stipulates that the 

Executive Agent for Space shall develop, coordinate, and integrate plans 

and programs for space systems and the acquisition of space major 

 1

 Section 3.1, DOD Directive 5101.1, DOD Executive Agent, Sept. 3, 2002. 

DOD’s Space Cadre 

Management 

Approach Is 

Incomplete 

DOD Has Not Established 

Accountability by Issuing 

Guidance to 

Institutionalize Space 

Cadre Authority and 

Responsibilities 
Page 14 GAO-05-833 Defense Space Activities 

defense acquisition programs to provide operational space force 

capabilities to ensure the United States has the space power to achieve its 

national security objectives. However, the specific authority and 

responsibilities of the Executive Agent for Space related to the 

defensewide space cadre are not defined in this directive. Therefore, there 

is no defensewide accountability for developing and integrating the space 

cadre that was called for by the Space Commission. DOD included in its 

space human capital strategy general space cadre responsibilities that 

were derived from the directive, including that the Executive Agent has 

the responsibility to lead efforts to synchronize the services’ space cadre 

activities and to integrate the services’ space personnel career fields to the 

maximum extent practicable. 

The Executive Agent established a structure of three groups to address 

various activities related to the defensewide space cadre, but there is no 

defensewide guidance to require this structure. As called for in the 

strategy, the Executive Agent established the Space Professional Oversight 

Board, which is the senior officer forum for the discussion and resolution 

of matters concerning space professional development within DOD. The 

board is chaired by the Executive Agent, with senior representatives from 

the services and various other DOD organizations. As of March 2005, the 

oversight board had held two meetings that included briefings and 

discussions on the space personnel of each service and of the National 

Reconnaissance Office, space graduate education, space critical positions, 

and space acquisition personnel. In addition, the Executive Agent has 

chartered two working groups below the level of the board. The Human 

Capital Resources Working Group, which includes personnel from the 

services and other DOD components, is responsible for implementing the 

strategy by supporting the oversight board and acting as the primary 

action working group for the development of space professionals. The 

Joint Space Academic Group includes representatives from the Naval 

Postgraduate School and the Air Force Institute of Technology and was 

chartered to help ensure that the graduate education needs of military 

space professionals are met, particularly at these two schools. 

DOD has not developed specific defensewide space cadre guidance 

because it has not completed identifying the key space cadre 

responsibilities and management structure that should continue over time. 

DOD could be better able to develop specific DOD guidance after it makes 

progress in completing the tasks to implement its space human capital 

strategy. Without detailed DOD guidance to require the continuation of 

defensewide development and management functions, the Executive 

Agent and the services will not be in the best position to continue to make 
Page 15 GAO-05-833 Defense Space Activities 

improvements to the defensewide space cadre and move toward 

establishing a sufficient number of space professionals with the required 

training, education, experience, and vision to advance the use of space 

power and transform military operations. 

DOD has not developed performance measures and a plan to evaluate 

those measures in order to assess space cadre professional development 

and management, as provided for in a results-oriented management 

approach. Performance indicators and an evaluation plan would help DOD 

measure program outcomes and compare results to goals. Sound general 

management tenets, embraced by the Government Performance and 

Results Act of 1993, require agencies to pursue results-oriented 

management, whereby program effectiveness is measured in terms of 

outcomes or impact, rather than outputs, such as activities and processes.2

Such a management approach can provide DOD and the military services 

with a framework for strategic planning and effectively implementing and 

managing programs. One principle of results-oriented management is to 

define the program’s overall purpose, mission, and intent, such as DOD 

has done in its space human capital strategy. Another principle is to 

describe detailed implementation actions and DOD has issued an 

implementation plan for its strategy that includes implementing tasks. 

Critical elements of an implementation plan include performance 

indicators, which are mechanisms to measure outcomes of the program, 

and an evaluation plan, which serves as a means to compare and report on 

program results versus performance goals. 

The DOD directive establishing the Executive Agent required the services 

to provide the Executive Agent with key indicators reflecting the status of, 

or changes to, their cadre of space professionals to support the Executive 

Agent’s planning, programming, and acquisition activities. In addition, 

DOD’s space human capital strategy and its implementation plan provided 

for the collection of defensewide data on the services’ space cadres and an 

evaluation plan to assess their performance. The strategy called for the 

Executive Agent to collect data from the services in the first phase of the 

strategy’s implementation by April 2004. The strategy’s implementation 

plan also contained the following goal: ensure the services, combatant 

commands, and agencies (as necessary) develop space professionals to 

fulfill their unique mission needs. According to the implementation plan, 

 2

 Pub. L. 103-62 (1993). 

DOD Has Not Developed 

Performance Measures to 

Assess Space Cadre 

Development 
Page 16 GAO-05-833 Defense Space Activities 

this goal is to be accomplished by oversight in the form of an evaluation 

plan. An evaluation plan could include various performance measures, 

such as education levels, space positions unfilled, promotion and retention 

rates, and personnel availability projections. 

DOD has not developed performance measures and an evaluation plan, as 

called for in the implementation plan. Instead, the Executive Agent 

deferred to the services to develop performance measures because 

defense officials believe the services’ space cadres are so different that it 

is not appropriate to develop uniform defensewide performance measures. 

However, we observe that the Executive Agent should not have deferred 

to the services and that it is appropriate for the Executive Agent and the 

services to develop defensewide performance measures. Although some 

performance measures could be uniform across the services, such as 

education levels and promotion and retention rates, other performance 

measures could be tailored for service-unique situations. As an example of 

a service-unique situation, the Air Force brings in its space officers at the 

entry level and may want a performance measure to assess their progress 

in bringing in entry-level space personnel. However, the other services do 

not place officers in the space cadre at the entry level and would not need 

a similar measure. The Executive Agent is relying on the services’ briefings 

to the oversight board to provide indicators on the status of their space 

cadres, such as numbers, skills, and competencies of the services’ space 

personnel and numbers and locations of space positions. However, these 

briefings did not contain detailed performance measures related to goals 

for the defensewide space cadre. In addition, the Executive Agent has not 

developed a defensewide evaluation plan because it has deferred to the 

services to assess the state of their cadres. DOD officials asserted that the 

services are taking more initiative to develop their own space cadres, thus 

reducing the need for oversight by the Executive Agent. However, we 

observe that the services’ performance measures alone, without a 

defensewide evaluation plan, would not provide the Executive Agent with 

an evaluation of progress in developing the defensewide space cadre. 

The services have not reported any performance measures to the 

Executive Agent and there is no DOD requirement for the services to have 

such performance measures. Without quantifiable, detailed performance 

measures and a plan to evaluate progress, each service will continue to 

develop and manage a service-unique cadre of space professionals at its 

own pace to support its unique mission requirements. However, the 

Executive Agent, as well as the Secretary of Defense and Congress, may 

not be able to assess actions taken by the services by comparing their 

results to goals. In addition, this may make it more difficult for the 
Page 17 GAO-05-833 Defense Space Activities 

Executive Agent to synchronize the space cadre activities of the DOD, as 

called for in the space human capital strategy and its implementation plan. 

In the absence of continuous proactive defensewide space cadre 

leadership, the military services have made varying progress in planning 

and completing initiatives to develop and manage their space cadres since 

our August 2004 report.3

 The services have each taken their own separate 

actions to consider adding and identifying additional personnel and 

positions to their space cadres. In addition, each service has planned and 

pursued its own other initiatives to address the unique needs of its space 

cadre and these initiatives are in various stages of completion. Some of 

these initiatives include working on policy guidance related to the space 

cadre, completing space cadre strategies, developing certification of space 

professionals, identifying and increasing space education opportunities, 

and assigning codes to personnel based on the nature of their space 

expertise. Without proactive DOD leadership and oversight with regard to 

the services’ initiatives, neither the Secretary of Defense nor Congress will 

have the assurance that the services are obtaining and developing the 

space cadre that was called for by the Space Commission. 

The services have each continued to identify their space cadres, which 

includes obtaining information on their personnel, such as their space 

education and experience, and on space positions, such as their locations 

and requirements. The services have obtained this information by 

surveying space personnel and organizations where space personnel serve 

and by querying their personnel systems. Each service has military officers 

as space cadre members and is considering the inclusion of others, such as 

additional officers, enlisted personnel, and civilian employees. The Air 

Force is the only service that has formally included enlisted personnel as 

space cadre members and it is currently identifying civilians, which it 

expects to complete by January 2006. Furthermore, the Air Force has 

established and continued to build a database that captures education and 

experience information on each of its space professionals. The Navy is 

working to formally identify the enlisted, reserve component, and civilian 

members of its space cadre, with the goal of identifying reserve officers 

and civilians by the end of November 2005 and the enlisted members 

shortly thereafter. The Army is conducting a space personnel force 

 3 GAO-04-697. 

Services’ Progress on 

Space Cadre 

Development 

Initiatives Varies 

Military Services Continue 

to Identify Their Space 

Cadres 
Page 18 GAO-05-833 Defense Space Activities 

management analysis that is expected to be completed in September 2005, 

which includes considering expanding its space cadre beyond its current 

space operations officers. The Marine Corps does not currently have 

enlisted or civilian personnel in its space cadre, but it is considering 

including additional active and reserve officers. As shown in table 3, there 

are a total of 8,211 officer and enlisted space personnel across DOD. 

Table 3: DOD Space Personnel by Service as of March 2005 

Service 

Number of 

space officers

Number of 

space enlisted 

Total number of 

space personnel

Air Force 6,051 1,383 7,434

Navy 511 0a 511

Army 156 0b 156

Marine Corps 110 0 110

DOD-wide 6,828 1,383 8,211

Source: GAO’s analysis of information provided by the services. 

a

The Navy is working to formally identify the enlisted members of its space cadre. 

b

The Army is conducting an analysis to determine if its space cadre will include enlisted personnel. 

In addition to identifying their space personnel, the services have also 

identified 7,662 positions for their space personnel throughout DOD at the 

service, joint, and interagency levels. DOD has 1,401 DOD space positions, 

which is about 18 percent of the total, located in organizations that are not 

responsible to the military departments. Examples of these organizations 

outside the services include the Joint Staff, combatant commands, and the 

National Reconnaissance Office. For example, the U.S. Strategic 

Command, a joint combatant command responsible to the Secretary of 

Defense, has 275 officer positions, or 23 percent of its total officer 

positions, which call for expertise in space. Space positions involve 

responsibilities that encompass the entire life cycle of space systems, from 

research, development, and acquisition to space launch and operations. As 

shown in table 4, the Air Force has by far the largest number of space 

positions throughout DOD at 7,195, accounting for approximately 94 

percent of the total DOD positions. 
Page 19 GAO-05-833 Defense Space Activities 

Table 4: DOD Space Positions by Service as of March 2005 

Service 

Total number of 

space positions

Number of space 

positions outside 

the service 

Percentage of space 

positions outside 

the service

Air Force 7,195 1,153 16

Navy 248 160 65

Army 151 56 37

Marine Corps 68 32 47

DOD total 7,662 1,401 18

Source: GAO’s analysis of information provided by the military services. 

The Navy and Marine Corps have significantly more space personnel than 

space positions because their space personnel generally rotate between 

space positions and other positions that are not considered space 

positions. However, the Air Force and Army have approximately the same 

number of space personnel and space positions. This is because Air Force 

and Army space personnel, after they have become part of the space 

cadre, tend to remain in space positions throughout their careers. 

In addition to identifying their space cadres, each service has continued to 

implement its own initiatives to address the unique needs of their space 

cadres since our August 2004 report, and they are in various stages of 

completion. The Air Force has continued to take actions to implement its 

space cadre strategy. The Navy has published its space cadre strategy and 

established the space cadre advisor as its permanent organizational focal 

point. The Army has continued to conduct an analysis to determine future 

courses of action for its space cadre, which could lead to an approved 

space cadre strategy and a permanent organizational focal point. The 

Marine Corps continues to implement the initiatives contained in its space 

cadre strategy. 

In our August 2004 report, we noted that the Air Force approved a strategy 

in July 2003 that provides guidance on developing and sustaining the Air 

Force’s space cadre and has an implementation plan for the execution of 

the strategy’s initiatives. The implementation plan focused on six key 

initiatives: identification and classification of space personnel, 

certification of space personnel, professional development of space 

personnel, space positions and requirements, establishment of a 

permanent space professional management function, and education and 

training of space personnel. We also noted in our August 2004 report that 

Services Are Implementing 

Their Own Space Cadre 

Initiatives 

Air Force Continues to Take 

Actions to Develop Its Space 

Cadre 
Page 20 GAO-05-833 Defense Space Activities 

the Air Force designated the Air Force Space Command as the focal point 

for managing career development, education, and training for the Air 

Force space cadre. 

The Air Force has continued to implement its space human capital 

strategy’s initiatives since our last report. In order to identify and classify 

its space cadre, referred to as space professionals, the Air Force has 

identified the unique space expertise that differentiates space 

professionals from other Air Force career fields and has sorted this space 

expertise into 11 categories, or space experience codes, such as satellite 

systems and space control. Space professionals have been assigned these 

space experience codes based on the nature of their space education and 

experience. To address the certification of space professionals, the Air 

Force has established a three-level certification program to measure 

progress throughout an individual’s career. Air Force officials reported 

that they are placing their space professionals at one of the three 

certification levels to indicate the depth of their space expertise. Achieving 

and maintaining the certification levels requires continued space 

education, training, and experience over the course of a career and is 

intended to provide the space professional with a career path. In addition, 

the Air Force has issued career planning guidance for all officer, enlisted, 

and civilian space professionals to provide general information on career 

development and career paths, including information on the three 

certification levels. In order to address another of the strategy’s key 

initiatives, the Air Force is determining the education and experience 

requirements for all of its space positions. Moreover, the Air Force has 

completed a career opportunities guide, which contains information on all 

Air Force space positions, including the locations of and requirements for 

these positions. According to Air Force officials, the purpose of this 

information is to better identify and track space professionals and assign 

them to space positions. To further address management of its space 

professionals, the Air Force is planning to issue an Air Force policy 

document and an Air Force Space Command instruction to require 

continuing management functions for Air Force space professionals. Air 

Force officials also related that they have undertaken significant efforts to 

brief personnel on the Air Force space professional development program, 

briefing a total of 4,950 personnel at 36 DOD locations between August 

2004 and April 2005. 

In addition, the Air Force Space Command established the National 

Security Space Institute, formerly known as the Air Force Space 

Operations School, in October 2004 in order to address the Air Force 

strategy’s initiative to institute stronger, technically oriented space 
Page 21 GAO-05-833 Defense Space Activities 

education and training programs. The vision of the National Security 

Space Institute is to be a multiservice organization that provides integrated 

military and civilian space power education and training to senior and 

intermediate space leaders. The school has grown by 44 percent in recent 

years, from 629 resident students in fiscal year 2000 to 904 in fiscal year 

2004. Although the Air Force made up 79 percent of the National Security 

Space Institute’s military students in fiscal year 2004, military and civilian 

students from throughout DOD have attended the institute. Among the 

courses offered by the National Security Space Institute is Space 200, a 4-

week course for midcareer space professionals with an emphasis on 

warfighter integration of space power. The Air Force has made Space 200, 

which has significant technical, nuclear, and acquisition content, a 

requirement for the intermediate certification level for its space 

professionals. Space cadre members from all the services regularly attend 

this course. For example, the Army is now sending its new space 

operations officers to part of the Space 200 course at the National Security 

Space Institute, which has replaced some, but not all, of the Army’s own 

space operations officer qualification training. 

In August 2004, we reported that the Navy’s actions to develop and 

manage its space cadre were limited because it had not developed a space 

human capital strategy to provide direction and guidance for Navy actions 

or established a permanent management focal point to provide centralized 

leadership to develop the strategy and oversee implementation. However, 

the Navy had designated an advisor for space cadre issues. 

Since our last report, the Navy approved a space cadre human capital 

strategy in January 2005, which incorporates the Navy’s long-term goals 

and approaches and is consistent with DOD’s space human capital 

strategy. Among the objectives included in the strategy are the 

development and implementation of space professional development 

policies and practices and the creation of a human capital management 

team to address space professional development issues. In May 2005, the 

Navy revised its space policy implementation guidance to delineate Navy 

space roles and responsibilities that included designating the Navy space 

cadre advisor to act as a manager for the space cadre.4

 This action 

established a permanent organizational focal point by formalizing the 

responsibilities of the Navy space cadre advisor. In addition, in March 

2005, the Navy designated the Commander, Naval Network Warfare 

 4

 OPNAV Instruction 5400.43, May 20, 2005. 

Navy Has Issued a Space Cadre 

Strategy and Established an 

Organizational Focal Point 
Page 22 GAO-05-833 Defense Space Activities 

Command, as its space cadre functional authority, which is the senior 

Navy leader for the development and management oversight of the Navy 

space cadre. Finally, the Navy provided funding to manage the Navy space 

cadre community for the first time beginning in fiscal year 2005 and has 

allocated $851,000 for this purpose for fiscal year 2006, including funding 

for space cadre advisors, contractor support, and training. 

In our August 2004 report, we noted that the Army has had a space cadre 

consisting of space operations officers since 1999. The Army issued career 

development guidance for its space operations officers and developed a 

qualification training course to provide space operations officers with the 

essential skills needed to plan and conduct space operations. We also 

reported that the Army had been studying if enlisted personnel should be 

added to its space cadre. Although the Army had taken these actions, we 

reported that it did not have clear goals and objectives for the future of its 

space cadre because it had not developed a space human capital strategy 

or identified a permanent organizational focal point to manage its space 

cadre. 

Since our last report, the Army has incorporated its enlisted study into an 

overall force management analysis of the Army space cadre, which is 

considering officers, enlisted, and civilian personnel for inclusion in the 

cadre. This force management analysis has been under way since June 

2004 and consists of four separate phases. The first two phases centered 

on developing a potential definition of the Army space cadre and 

identifying space cadre roles, missions, organizations, functions, and skills 

based on this potential definition. The third phase involved the 

development of comprehensive courses of action related to Army space 

cadre policies. The Army is currently engaged in the fourth phase of the 

force management analysis, which involves a comprehensive analysis of 

Army doctrine, organization, training, materiel, leadership and education, 

personnel, and facilities and the development of an Army space cadre 

strategy. The Army expects to complete its force management analysis by 

September 2005 and provide the results to the Army Vice Chief of Staff for 

decision. When approved, the Army plans to use the results of the force 

management analysis to establish a future course of action by publishing 

an Army space human capital strategy, and to determine new roles and 

tasks for an Army space cadre office that would be a permanent 

organizational focal point. 

In our August 2004 report, we stated that the Marine Corps identified an 

organizational focal point to manage its space cadre. We also reported that 

the Marine Corps has a space cadre strategy to develop and manage its 

Army Is Conducting Analysis to 

Determine Future Space Cadre 

Actions 

Marine Corps Continues to 

Implement Its Space Cadre 

Strategy 
Page 23 GAO-05-833 Defense Space Activities 

space cadre and has an implementation plan to track initiatives. Among 

the initiatives included in the Marine Corps’ strategy were: improving 

space operations professional military education for all officers, focusing 

the graduate education of space operations students, and leveraging 

interservice space training. 

Since our last report, the Marine Corps has continued to implement 

initiatives contained in its strategy. For example, in order to improve 

space professional military education, the Marine Corps has revised its 

Command and Staff College curricula to address space issues. In addition, 

the Marine Corps is developing education and training requirements for its 

space officers and expects to publish these requirements, when finalized, 

in a training and readiness manual. In order to focus the graduate 

education of its space operations students to support service needs, the 

Marine Corps has identified positions requiring graduate degrees and is 

assigning space operations officers to these positions based on their Naval 

Postgraduate School coursework. Additionally, the Marine Corps has 

made progress on leveraging interservice space training by working with 

the Air Force’s National Security Space Institute to ensure Marine Corps’ 

training requirements for its space operations staff officers are met. 

Finally, the Marine Corps is in the process of drafting an implementation 

policy to delineate space roles and responsibilities and to describe how 

the Marine Corps will engage in national security space activities. 

Recent military operations have demonstrated that space-based 

capabilities are critical to mission success. Although DOD has benefited 

from a cadre of space professionals who are educated, motivated, and 

skilled in space activities, DOD has taken limited actions to ensure the 

future success of its space cadre because it has not established a complete 

results-oriented management approach. Without guidance to require 

accountability for space cadre development and management functions, 

DOD’s efforts to make improvements to its space cadre may not continue. 

Further, without quantifiable, detailed performance measures for its space 

cadre, DOD may not be able to evaluate the progress the services have 

made by comparing results to goals. Without proactive DOD leadership 

and oversight with regard to the services’ initiatives, neither the Secretary 

of Defense nor Congress will have the assurance that the services are 

acquiring and developing the space cadre that was called for by the Space 

Commission. As a result of the lack of a complete management approach, 

DOD may not be able to move toward establishing a defensewide cadre of 

space professionals with the required training, education, experience, and 

vision to advance the use of space power and transform military 

Conclusions 
Page 24 GAO-05-833 Defense Space Activities 

operations. DOD also may not be able to fully address the concern of the 

Space Commission that it lacked a strong military space culture that 

includes focused career development and education and training. In 

addition, the Space Commission stated that DOD must place a high 

priority on intensifying investments in space career development, 

education, and training to develop and sustain a highly competent and 

motivated space cadre. 

We recommend that the Secretary of Defense take the following two 

actions: 

• Issue defensewide guidance to provide accountability by defining and 

institutionalizing space cadre authorities and responsibilities, to include: 

• defining the Executive Agent’s specific authority and responsibilities 

related to the defensewide space cadre and leadership role in 

synchronizing the services’ space cadre activities; 

• specifying space cadre human capital development and management 

functions for the services and other DOD components; and 

• defining the defensewide structure related to developing and managing 

the space cadre, such as the Space Professional Oversight Board. 

• Direct the DOD Executive Agent for Space, in conjunction with the 

military services, to develop appropriate performance measures for each 

service and an evaluation plan to indicate results related to goals in order 

to help evaluate DOD’s progress in integrating and developing its space 

personnel over time. 

In its written comments on this report, DOD agreed with the 

recommendations. DOD’s comments are reprinted in their entirety in 

appendix II. DOD also provided technical comments that we have 

incorporated as appropriate. 

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, the Navy, and the Air Force; and the 

Commandant of the Marine Corps. We will also make copies available to 

others upon request. In addition, this report will be available at no charge 

on the GAO Web site at http://www.gao.gov. 

Recommendations for 

Executive Action 

Agency Comments 
Page 25 GAO-05-833 Defense Space Activities 

If you or your staffs 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 III. 

Davi M. D’Agostino 

Director, Defense Capabilities 

 and Management 
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology 

Page 26 GAO-05-833 Defense Space Activities 

To determine the progress the Department of Defense (DOD) has made in 

implementing the defensewide actions contained in its strategy to 

integrate and develop its space cadre, we reviewed the status of actions 

taken on the tasks in DOD’s implementation plan for its space human 

capital strategy. Specifically, we measured DOD’s progress in completing 

the tasks contained in the implementation plan by discussing the 

implementation with officials in the National Security Space Office and 

other organizations. We also obtained and analyzed available 

documentation related to the implementation of the plan’s tasks, such as 

presentations to the Space Professional Oversight Board and minutes of 

the board’s meetings. 

To assess DOD’s management approach for the departmentwide space 

cadre, we reviewed and analyzed DOD’s approach for implementing its 

strategy and compared it to a results-oriented management approach. We 

also analyzed the DOD directive establishing the Executive Agent for 

Space and DOD’s space human capital strategy, both of which provide 

general responsibilities to DOD components for the space cadre. We 

discussed the implementation of a management approach for DOD’s space 

cadre development efforts with the Executive Agent’s staff and analyzed 

documentation to assess the actions taken to date to develop performance 

measures and require continuous space cadre responsibilities. We also 

discussed DOD’s management efforts with officials at the Office of the 

Secretary of Defense; the Joint Staff; and the U.S. Strategic Command, 

Offutt Air Force Base, Nebraska. Finally, we discussed defensewide 

management efforts with representatives of the military services, including 

the following offices: Air Force Space Command, Peterson Air Force Base, 

Colorado; the Army Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations and 

Plans, Arlington, Virginia; the Army Space Operations Officer Proponency 

Office, Arlington, Virginia; the Office of the Navy Space Cadre Advisor, 

Arlington, Virginia; and the Office of Plans, Policies, and Operations, 

Headquarters, U.S. Marine Corps, Arlington, Virginia. 

To determine the progress the services have made since our August 2004 

report in planning and completing initiatives to develop and manage their 

space cadres, we analyzed documentation on strategies, initiatives, and 

other implementing actions for each service and discussed them with 

service officials. We also collected and analyzed data on space positions 

and personnel from all of the services and from the U.S. Strategic 

Command and on students, staff, and courses from the Air Force’s 

National Security Space Institute. We assessed the reliability of the Air 

Force’s database for its space personnel by (1) reviewing existing 

information about the data and the system that provided them, and (2) 

Appendix I: Scope and Methodology 
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology 

Page 27 GAO-05-833 Defense Space Activities 

interviewing Air Force and contractor officials knowledgeable about the 

data. We determined that the data were sufficiently reliable for the 

purposes of this report. Offices visited to accomplish this objective were 

the Air Force Space Command, Peterson Air Force Base, Colorado; the 

National Security Space Institute, Colorado Springs, Colorado; the Army 

Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations and Plans, Arlington, 

Virginia; the Army Space Operations Officer Proponency Office, Arlington, 

Virginia; Office of the Navy Space Cadre Advisor, Arlington, Virginia; and 

the Office of Plans, Policies, and Operations, Headquarters, U.S. Marine 

Corps, Arlington, Virginia. 

We conducted our review from September 2004 through June 2005 in 

accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 
Appendix II: Comments from the Department 

of Defense 

 Page 28 GAO-05-833 Defense Space Activities 

Appendix II: Comments from the Department 

of Defense 
Appendix II: Comments from the Department 

of Defense 

 Page 29 GAO-05-833 Defense Space Activities 
Appendix III: GAO Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgments 

Page 30 GAO-05-833 Defense Space Activities 

Davi M. D’Agostino (202) 512-5431 

In addition to the contact named above, the following made key 

contributions to this report: Margaret G. Morgan, Assistant Director; 

Gabrielle M. Anderson; Alan M. Byroade; Nicole Harms; Renee S. 

McElveen; and Monica L. Wolford. 

Appendix III: GAO Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgments 

GAO Contact 

Acknowledgments 

(350574) 
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 

GAO’s Mission 

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