WARFIGHTER 

SUPPORT

DOD Needs Additional 

Steps to Fully 

Integrate Operational 

Contract Support into 

Contingency Planning

Report to the Chairman, Subcommittee 

on Contracting Oversight, Committee 

on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs, U.S. Senate

February 2013

GAO-13-212

United States Government Accountability Office

GAO
United States Government Accountability Office

Highlights of GAO-13-212, a report to the 

Chairman, Subcommittee on Contracting 

Oversight, Committee on Homeland Security 

and Governmental Affairs, U.S. Senate

February 2013

WARFIGHTER SUPPORT

DOD Needs Additional Steps to Fully Integrate Operational 

Contract Support into Contingency Planning

Why GAO Did This Study

DOD has relied extensively on 

contractors for operations in Iraq and 

Afghanistan over the past decade. At 

the height of Operation Iraqi Freedom, 

the number of contractors exceeded 

the number of military personnel, and a 

similar situation is occurring in 

Afghanistan. In January 2011, the 

Secretary of Defense issued a 

memorandum noting the risk of DOD’s 

level of dependency on contractors 

and outlined actions to institutionalize 

changes necessary to influence how 

the department plans for contracted 

support in contingency operations. The 

memorandum also called for 

leveraging the civilian expeditionary

workforce to reduce DOD’s reliance on 

contractors, but this workforce is not 

yet fully developed. GAO was asked to 

examine DOD’s progress in planning 

for operational contract support. Our 

review determined how DOD is 

integrating operational contract support 

into its planning through efforts of the 

(1) OSD, Joint Staff, and military 

services, and (2) combatant 

commands and their components. To 

conduct its work, GAO evaluated DOD 

operational contract support guidance 

and documents and met with officials 

at various DOD offices.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that the Navy , 

Marine Corps and Air Force provide 

guidance on planning for operational 

contract support; that the Joint Staff 

provide training for all planners; that 

the planners broaden their focus to 

include areas beyond logistics; and 

that expertise is offered to service 

components to further integrate

operational contract support into plans. 

DOD generally agreed with the 

recommendations.

What GAO Found

The Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD), the Joint Staff, and the services

have taken steps to integrate operational contract support into planning for 

contingency operations. For example, in April 2011, the Under Secretary of 

Defense for Policy, working with the Joint Staff, revised the Guidance for the 

Employment of the Force to require planning for operational contract support in 

all phases of military operations. Further, in December 2011, the Department of 

Defense (DOD) revised an instruction and issued corresponding regulations 

establishing policies and procedures for operational contract support. The Army 

issued service-specific guidance that describes roles, responsibilities, and 

requirements to help integrate operational contract support into its planning

efforts for contingency operations. However, the Navy, Marine Corps, and Air 

Force have not issued similar comprehensive guidance for integrating 

operational contract support throughout each service. Instead, these services

have taken actions such as developing training and other individual efforts to 

familiarize servicemembers with operational contract support. According to 

service officials, one reason that they have not issued comprehensive guidance 

similar to the Army’s guidance is because the Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force 

have not been the lead service for contracting in recent operations. However, 

these services combined spent over a billion dollars for contracted services in 

Afghanistan in fiscal year 2011. Without specific, service-wide guidance, the 

other services’ future planning efforts may not reflect the full extent of the use of 

contract support and the attendant cost and need for oversight. 

The combatant commands and their components have begun to incorporate 

operational contract support into their planning for contingencies, but they have 

not fully integrated operational contract support in all functional areas. We found 

that the combatant commands and components are not planning for the potential 

use of contractors in areas where they may be needed beyond logistics such as 

communications. Recognizing the problem, DOD, in October 2012, issued 

guidance that calls on functional planners beyond the logistics area to identify 

major support functions planned for commercial support sourcing. GAO also 

found that officials involved with logistics planning at the commands receive 

training from the Joint Staff and assistance from embedded operational contract 

support planners to help integrate operational contract support into logistics 

planning. However, officials involved in planning for other areas—such as 

intelligence—that have used contractors in past operations, do not receive such 

training. Further, the embedded operational contract support planners do not 

focus on areas beyond logistics. Moreover, while the combatant commands have 

embedded experts to assist with operational contract support planning, the 

military service components do not have such expertise. Without training for all 

planners, a broader focus beyond logistics for embedded planners, and expertise 

offered at the military service components, DOD risks being unprepared to plan 

and manage deployed contractor personnel and may not be able to provide the 

necessary oversight during future contingencies. 

View GAO-13-212. For more information, 

contact Cary Russell at (202) 512-5431 or 

russellc@gao.gov.
Page i GAO-13-212 Warfighter Support

Letter 1 

Background 6

OSD, the Joint Staff, and the Services Have Taken Steps to 

Integrate Operational Contract Support, but Most of the Military 

Services Have Not Issued Comprehensive Guidance 9

Combatant Commands and Components Have Taken Positive 

Steps, but Face Challenges in Fully Integrating Operational 

Contract Support into Their Contingency Planning Processes 22

Conclusions 31

Recommendations for Executive Action 32

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation 33

Appendix I Scope and Methodology 36

Appendix II Comments from the Department of Defense 39

Appendix III GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments 43

Related GAO Products 44

Figures

Figure 1: The Geographic Combatant Commands’ and Their 

Components’ Areas of Responsibilities 7

Figure 2: OSD and Joint Staff Actions Taken and Efforts Underway 

to Integrate Operational Contract Support into 

Departmental Planning 11

Contents 
Page ii GAO-13-212 Warfighter Support

Abbreviations

DOD Department of Defense 

J-4 Joint Staff Logistics Directorate 

OSD Office of the Secretary of Defense 

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.
Page 1 GAO-13-212 Warfighter Support

United States Government Accountability Office

Washington, DC 20548

February 8, 2013

The Honorable Claire McCaskill

Chairman

Subcommittee on Contracting Oversight

Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs

United States Senate

Senator McCaskill:

The Department of Defense (DOD) has relied extensively on contractors 

for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan over the past decade. At the height 

of Operation Iraqi Freedom, the number of contractors exceeded the 

number of military personnel, and a similar situation is occurring in 

support of Operation Enduring Freedom. According to DOD, in 2012, the 

number of contractors in Afghanistan exceeded 109,000 compared to the 

approximately 84,200 military personnel present at that same time. 

According to DOD regulations, operational contract support is the ability 

to orchestrate and synchronize the provision of integrated contract 

support and management of contractor personnel providing support to the 

joint force within a designated operational area.1 In Afghanistan, 

contractors provide traditional logistical support, such as base operating 

support (food and housing) and maintaining weapon systems. 

Additionally, contractors provide nonlogistical support, such as 

intelligence analysts and interpreters who accompany military patrols. 

DOD anticipates continued reliance on contractors for future operations.

Our previous work has highlighted long-standing problems regarding the 

oversight and management of contractors supporting deployed forces and 

the department’s failure to fully integrate operational contract support 

within DOD. For example, we and others have identified instances in Iraq 

and Afghanistan where DOD’s acquisition and non-acquisition personnel

were in short supply, were not properly trained, or were not fully aware of 

their responsibilities. Since 1992, we have designated DOD contract 

 

1

32 C.F.R. § 158.3 (2012). DOD joint doctrine describes operational contract support as 

the process of planning for and obtaining supplies, services, and construction from 

commercial sources in support of joint operations along with the associated contractor 

management functions. Joint Chiefs of Staff, Joint Pub. 4-10, Operational Contract 

Support at GL-8 (Oct. 17, 2008) (hereinafter cited as Joint Pub. 4-10 (Oct. 17, 2008)). 

 
 

Page 2 GAO-13-212 Warfighter Support

management as a high-risk area.2 In our February 2011 report on highrisk areas, we reported that DOD needed to, among other things, fully 

integrate operational contract support throughout the department through 

education and predeployment training. In June 2010, because of the 

department not fully integrating operational contract support, we called for 

a cultural change in DOD—one that emphasized an awareness of 

operational contract support throughout all entities of the department to 

help address the challenges faced in ongoing and future contingency 

operations—and last September, we testified that DOD still faced

challenges achieving such a change.3 We recognize that effecting a 

cultural change is a major undertaking for organizations, especially for an 

organization as large and multifaceted as DOD. Effecting a cultural 

change involves, for example, developing and communicating a vision for 

the future, neutralizing impediments to change, identifying stakeholders in 

the change process, and promoting continued support from senior 

leaders.4 Additionally, Congress has enacted legislation requiring DOD to 

take specific actions to improve its management and oversight of 

contractors in contingency operations.5 For example, in the John Warner 

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007, Congress 

required DOD to develop joint policies for requirements definition,

contingency program management, and contingency contracting during 

combat and postconflict operations.6 A provision in the National Defense 

 

2

GAO, High-Risk Series: An Update, GAO-11-278 (Washington, D.C.: Feb. 16, 2011).

3

GAO, Warfighter Support: Cultural Change Needed to Improve How DOD Plans for and 

Manages Operational Contract Support, GAO-10-829T (Washington, D.C.: June 29, 2010)

and Operational Contract Support: Sustained DOD Leadership Needed to Better Prepare 

for Future Contingencies, GAO-12-1026T (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 12, 2012).

4

GAO, Aviation Acquisition: A Comprehensive Strategy Is Needed for Cultural Change at 

FAA, GAO/RCED-96-159 (Washington, D.C.: Aug. 22, 1996).

5

A “contingency operation” is a military operation that either (a) is designated by the 

Secretary of Defense as an operation in which members of the armed forces are or may 

become involved in military actions, operations, or hostilities against U.S. enemies or 

against an opposing military force or (b) results in the call or order to, or retention on, 

active duty of members of the uniformed services under certain statutory provisions or any 

other provision of law during a war or during a national emergency declared by the 

President or Congress. See 10 U.S.C. § 101(a)(13).

6

See Pub. L. No. 109-364, § 854(a)(1) (2006). 
 

Page 3 GAO-13-212 Warfighter Support

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 added to this requirement,7 which 

is codified as amended at section 2333 of Title 10, United States Code.

DOD has taken steps toward making fundamental changes in how it 

approaches the issue of operational contract support. In January 2011, 

the Secretary of Defense issued a memorandum in which he expressed 

concern about the risks introduced by DOD’s current level of dependency 

on contractors, its future total force mix, and the need to better plan for 

operational contract support in the future.8 The Secretary outlined a 

number of actions needed to institutionalize the changes necessary to 

influence a cultural shift in how the department views, and accounts and 

plans for, contracted support in a contingency environment. In addition, in 

June 2011, the Director of the Joint Staff issued a memorandum to 

implement the direction in the Secretary’s memorandum and assigned 

Joint Staff directors to specific tasks regarding the integration of 

operational contract support and the civilian expeditionary workforce 

throughout DOD.9 Further, in December 2011, DOD issued DOD 

Instruction 3020.41 and corresponding regulations in the Code of Federal 

Regulations. The instruction and regulations established policy, assigned 

responsibilities, and provided procedures for operational contract support, 

including operational contract support program management, contract 

support integration, and integration of defense contractor personnel into 

contingency operations outside the United States.10

In addition to operational contract support, the Secretary of Defense’s 

January 2011 memorandum also addresses the need to better leverage 

the capabilities of the civilian expeditionary workforce in order to reduce 

the risk introduced by DOD’s level of reliance on contractors. Created in 

2009, the civilian expeditionary workforce is a DOD program that deploys 

civilian employees to support military operations. As of late 2012, it 

 

7

See Pub. L. No. 110-181, § 849(a) (2008).

8

Memorandum from the Secretary of Defense, “Strategic and Operational Planning for 

Operational Contract Support (OCS) and Workforce Mix” (Jan. 24, 2011).

9

Memorandum from the Director of the Joint Staff, DJSM 0380-11, “Implementation of 

SecDef Memorandum on Strategic and Operational Planning for Operational Contract 

Support (OCS) and Workforce Mix” (June 1, 2011).

10See Operational Contract Support, 32 C.F.R. pt. 158 (added by 76 Fed. Reg. 81,807 

(Dec. 29, 2011)); Department of Defense Instruction 3020.41, Operational Contract 

Support (OCS) (Dec. 20, 2011) (hereinafter cited as DODI 3020.41(Dec. 20, 2011)).
 

Page 4 GAO-13-212 Warfighter Support

comprised approximately 395 personnel, which is about 10 percent of the 

total number of civilians deployed in support of contingency operations.11

DOD established this workforce to create a cadre of civilians who are 

trained, cleared, and equipped to respond urgently to expeditionary 

requirements. However, according to officials from the civilian 

expeditionary workforce program office, the use of these individuals, to 

date, has been on an augmentee basis to fulfill individual requirements. In 

an effort to utilize the program as originally intended with a ready pool of 

qualified and trained civilians to support contingency operations, civilian 

expeditionary workforce officials stated that they are currently developing 

a DOD instruction that includes defining the critical skill sets for the 

civilian expeditionary workforce program.12 DOD expects to issue the 

instruction in late 2013. In the interim, DOD officials stated that they 

expect to release a policy memorandum ahead of the instruction that will 

address the civilian expeditionary workforce support and deployment 

procedures. According to officials from the services and combatant 

commands and their components, they are not planning for this workforce 

until the capabilities are further defined.

In light of continuing interest in DOD’s integration and management of 

contracted support in support of contingency operations, you asked us to 

examine DOD’s progress on institutionalizing the planning for operational 

contract support throughout the department. Specifically, our objectives 

were to determine how DOD is integrating planning for operational 

contract support through efforts of: (1) the Office of the Secretary of 

Defense (OSD), the Joint Staff, and the military services, and (2) the 

combatant commands and their components.

To conduct this review, we collected and analyzed documentation such 

as planning guidance and policies related to the integration of operational 

contract support into DOD’s planning for contingency operations. We 

reviewed plans and other efforts to understand DOD’s implementation of 

requirements to integrate operational contract support. We also 

interviewed officials from OSD, the Joint Staff, military services, and 

 

11According to DOD officials, DOD components and agencies concurrently continue to 

deploy their own civilians in support of contingency operations.

12DOD published a directive addressing the civilian expeditionary workforce in 2009. See

Department of Defense Directive 1404.10, DOD Civilian Expeditionary Workforce (Jan. 

23, 2009).
 

Page 5 GAO-13-212 Warfighter Support

combatant commands to obtain a comprehensive understanding of 

DOD’s efforts to integrate operational contract support. Specifically, to 

determine how OSD and the Joint Staff have taken steps to integrate 

operational contract support department-wide, we examined excerpts 

from strategic planning guidance and policies regarding operational 

contract support and met with officials from OSD and the Joint Staff. We 

reviewed DOD guidance on the civilian expeditionary workforce and 

interviewed officials from OSD, the Joint Staff, the civilian expeditionary 

workforce program office, military services, and combatant commands to 

understand the intent and the status of the development of the civilian 

expeditionary workforce program. To determine how the military services 

have integrated operational contract support into their operations, we 

collected and analyzed documentation related to operational contract 

support initiatives from each of the services. We also met with officials 

from the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force to gain an 

understanding of how each organization has implemented operational 

contract support to support strategic-level guidance and policy. To 

determine how combatant commands and their components have 

integrated operational contract support into planning, we reviewed 

selected operation and contingency plans to validate the integration of 

operational contract support considerations in those instances.13 We also 

met with officials from all of the geographic combatant commands (except 

U.S. Northern Command) and their components to gain knowledge about 

their current processes for planning for contingency operations.

We conducted this performance audit from January 2012 to February 

2013 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. Additional 

details on our scope and methodology are in appendix I.

 

13For this review, in order to verify the level at which the combatant commands and 

components were integrating operational contract support into plans, we requested 

combatant command and component officials to provide sample operation plans that 

included base plans with operational contract support considerations, Annex Ws, and 

other functional area annexes that also contained operational contract support language. 
 

Page 6 GAO-13-212 Warfighter Support

The U.S. military routinely uses contracted support in contingency 

operations. Military forces will often be significantly augmented with 

contracted support because of the continual introduction of hightechnology equipment, coupled with force structure and manning 

limitations, and the high pace of operations. Accordingly, DOD has 

recognized that the planning for and integration of contracted support into 

joint operations is important for the successful execution of military 

operations. Moreover, the Secretary of Defense’s January 2011 

memorandum addresses the need to better plan for operational contract 

support at the strategic and operational levels. The following describes 

the roles of various DOD offices involved in planning for operational 

contract support:

• The Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness is 

responsible for policy, plans, and program development for the total 

force, which includes military, DOD civilian, and DOD contractor 

personnel.

• The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and 

Logistics has the overall responsibility for the performance of the 

department’s acquisition system, including establishing and publishing 

policies and procedures governing the operations of the acquisition 

system and the administrative oversight of defense contracts.

• The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff has specific responsibilities 

in the areas of strategic direction as well as in strategic and 

contingency planning. The Joint Staff Logistics Directorate (J-4) 

provides plans, policy, guidance, and oversight on joint logistics, 

including joint contingency operational contract support matters.

• The Army, Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force (under their respective

Secretaries) are responsible for planning and executing contract 

support to their own forces unless directed otherwise by a combatant 

commander. The Secretaries of the military departments have been 

tasked in the Secretary of Defense’s January 2011 memorandum to 

assess how total force data (that is, the mix of military forces, 

contractors, and civilians) can inform planning and to assess 

opportunities for in-sourcing contracted capabilities that represent a 

high risk to the warfighter.

Background 

Organizational 

Responsibilities for 

Operational Contract 

Support 
 

Page 7 GAO-13-212 Warfighter Support

• The geographic combatant commands plan and oversee the military 

operations for their areas of responsibility. Combatant commanders 

are assigned military service components that assist them with further 

planning and execution of the missions (see fig. 1).14

Figure 1: The Geographic Combatant Commands’ and Their Components’ Areas of Responsibilities

 

14Additionally, the Secretaries of the military departments provide administration and 

support of the forces assigned or attached to the combatant commands, augmenting 

military support capabilities with contracted support when appropriate through their 

respective service component commands assigned to the combatant commands.
 

Page 8 GAO-13-212 Warfighter Support

• The Defense Logistics Agency, at the request of the combatant 

commands, has two expert planners from its Joint Contingency 

Acquisition Support Office placed in the logistics offices at each 

combatant command to improve the incorporation of operational 

contract support into combatant command plans.

The combatant commands and their components create plans to prepare 

for possible missions in their area. This planning begins with broad 

strategic guidance provided by the President, the Secretary of Defense, 

and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. This strategic guidance 

includes DOD documents, such as the Guidance for the Employment of 

the Force and the Joint Strategic Capabilities Plan,15 which tell combatant 

commanders what to plan for within their areas of responsibility. On the 

basis of the strategic guidance, combatant command planners write an 

operation plan to address particular contingencies. During this stage, a 

combatant commander can also task and provide guidance to the 

component commands to develop supporting plans for an operation plan. 

DOD doctrine suggests that, as a plan is developed, frequent dialogue 

between planners and senior DOD leadership is necessary to ensure that 

results are sufficient and feasible to meet mission objectives.

An operation plan describes how DOD will respond to a potential 

contingency that might require the use of military force. Such plans are 

used to deal with a wide range of events, such as terrorism, hostile 

foreign nations, and natural disasters. An operation plan consists of a 

base plan and annexes. A base plan describes the concept of operations, 

major forces, sustainment concept, and anticipated timelines for 

completing the mission. Base plans are written following a five-paragraph 

structure—Situation, Mission, Execution, Administration and Logistics, 

and Command and Control. Plans will generally include assumptions that 

are relevant to the development or successful execution of the plan and 

the concept of operation that the commander plans to use to accomplish 

 

15The Guidance for the Employment of the Force provides 2-year direction to combatant 

commanders for operational planning, force management, security cooperation, and 

posture planning. The 2011 version of the Guidance for the Employment of the Force 

directs contract support integration planning and contractor management planning for all 

phases of military operations. The Joint Strategic Capabilities Plan implements the 

Guidance for the Employment of the Force, providing military strategic and operational 

guidance to the combatant commanders, service chiefs, and combat support agencies for 

the preparation of campaign plans and contingency plans based on current military 

capabilities.

Contingency Planning
 

Page 9 GAO-13-212 Warfighter Support

the mission, including the forces involved, the phasing of operations, and 

the general nature and purpose of operations to be conducted. In addition 

to the base plan, operation plans sometimes include annexes that provide 

further details on areas such as intelligence (Annex B), operations (Annex 

C), logistics (Annex D), personnel (Annex E), communications (Annex K), 

and operational contract support (Annex W)—the latter generally includes 

information such as contract support, contracting capabilities, and 

capacities support estimates. While Annex D includes operational 

contract support considerations, we have previously reported that 

because DOD has typically relied on contractors in areas beyond 

logistics,16 it is important for DOD to conduct up-front planning for the use 

of contractors in all functional areas, not just logistics. In 2010, we 

recommended that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff require all 

base plans and nonlogistics annexes (e.g., intelligence and 

communication) to address the potential need for contractor support 

where appropriate.

OSD and the Joint Staff have taken steps to integrate operational contract 

support into departmental planning, but the Navy, Marine Corps, and Air 

Force have not issued comprehensive guidance for integrating 

operational contract support throughout each service’s planning efforts.

 

16GAO, Warfighter Support: DOD Needs to Improve Its Planning for Using Contractors to 

Support Future Military Operations, GAO-10-472 (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 30, 2010).

OSD, the Joint Staff, 

and the Services Have 

Taken Steps to 

Integrate Operational 

Contract Support, but 

Most of the Military 

Services Have Not 

Issued 

Comprehensive 

Guidance 
 

Page 10 GAO-13-212 Warfighter Support

OSD and the Joint Staff have issued several new or revised policies, 

undertaken other actions, and are revising other policies regarding 

operational contract support. These efforts are described in figure 2.

OSD and the Joint Staff 

Have Taken Actions and 

Have Other Efforts 

Underway to Plan for 

Operational Contract 

Support 
 

Page 11 GAO-13-212 Warfighter Support

Figure 2: OSD and Joint Staff Actions Taken and Efforts Underway to Integrate Operational Contract Support into 

Departmental Planning
 

Page 12 GAO-13-212 Warfighter Support

OSD and the Joint Staff have issued several new or revised policies on 

planning for operational contract support. In January 2011, the Secretary 

of Defense issued a memorandum to address the risks introduced by 

DOD’s level of dependency on contractors, its future total force mix, and 

the need to better plan for operational contract support in the future. The 

memorandum required, among other things, that the Under Secretary of 

Defense for Policy integrate operational contract support considerations 

into strategic planning documents and provide policy guidance on 

planning for contracted support in force planning scenario development. 

Also, the memorandum required that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of 

Staff collaboratively develop procedures to support operational contract 

support planning in the Joint Operation Planning and Execution System,17

including contractor support estimates and visibility of contractors 

accompanying the force. A memorandum issued by the Director of the 

Joint Staff in June 2011 further assigned Joint Staff directors to either 

lead or support specific tasks to implement the Secretary of Defense’s 

direction.

Working with the Joint Staff, the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy 

completed revisions in April 2011 to the Guidance for the Employment of 

the Force requiring that the combatant commands, together with their 

service components and relevant combat support agencies, plan for the 

integration of contracted support and contractor management in all 

phases of military operations. Additionally, the Joint Staff completed 

revisions in April 2011 to the Joint Strategic Capabilities Plan. The 

revisions included the requirement that operational contract support 

planning must occur at all plan levels and that, at a minimum, plans will 

identify anticipated contract support requirements by joint capability area, 

phase of operation, and area of need.

In addition to policy revisions, OSD and the Joint Staff have undertaken 

additional actions to ensure that planners better integrate operational 

contract support into the planning process. For example, at the request of 

the combatant commands, the Joint Staff has conducted operational 

 

17The Joint Operation Planning and Execution System consists of manuals that are used 

by joint commanders and war planners to monitor, plan, and execute mobilization, 

deployment, employment, and sustainment activities associated with joint operations, and 

provides users with access to joint operations planning policies and procedures. The Joint 

Operation Planning and Execution System is presently transitioning to the Adaptive 

Planning and Execution System.

OSD and the Joint Staff Have 

Issued New or Revised Policies 

and Undertaken Other Actions
 

Page 13 GAO-13-212 Warfighter Support

contract support training that explains changes to the planning 

requirements for the integration of operational contract support. 

Specifically, the Joint Staff held training seminars for operational contract 

support planners at Central Command and Southern Command in 

November 2011, at Pacific Command in January 2012, and at Africa and 

European Commands in May 2012 to highlight recent changes in 

guidance and processes.

In addition, the Functional Capabilities Integration Board, which was 

created in 2010, is actively monitoring ongoing operational contract 

support–related efforts across DOD and the progress toward timely 

completion of the direction in the Secretary’s January 2011 

memorandum. Chaired by the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for 

Program Support and the Vice Director for Logistics of the Joint Staff, the 

Functional Capabilities Integration Board is a senior executive–level body 

that includes officials from OSD, the military services, defense agencies, 

and the Joint Staff. The board meets quarterly to conduct independent 

assessments and analyses of operational contract support capabilities (to 

include supporting doctrine, organization, training, materiel, leadership 

and education, personnel, and facilities of the armed forces). It also seeks 

to establish and assess ways to improve performance and processes for 

assessing operational contract support readiness.

OSD and the Joint Staff are also revising other guidance on operational 

contract support and examining the extent to which operational contract 

support is integrated in DOD’s planning for operations, as noted in figure 

2. For example, the Joint Staff is overseeing an effort to revise a key 

doctrine document, Joint Publication 4-10, to incorporate, among other 

things, lessons learned from the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. Joint 

Publication 4-10 establishes doctrine for planning, conducting, and 

assessing operational contract support integration and contractor 

management functions in support of joint operations.18 The joint doctrine 

in the publication applies to the combatant commands and their service 

components, subunified commands, joint task forces, the services, and 

defense agencies in support of joint operations. According to Joint Staff 

officials, they expect to complete revisions to the guidance in November 

2013.

 

18See Joint Pub. 4-10 (Oct. 17, 2008).

OSD and the Joint Staff Are 

Also Revising Other Guidance 
 

Page 14 GAO-13-212 Warfighter Support

Moreover, the Joint Staff recently published, on October 18, 2012, the 

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Manual 3130.03 on Adaptive 

Planning and Execution, Planning Formats and Guidance, which replaces 

the Joint Operation Planning and Execution System Volume II.19 This 

manual will be used by joint commanders and war planners to monitor, 

plan, and execute mobilization, deployment, employment, and 

sustainment activities associated with joint operations and provide users 

with access to joint operations planning policies and procedures. 

Specifically, the Adaptive Planning and Execution manual requires that 

functional planners identify major support functions planned for 

commercial support sourcing. The manual also references Annex W in 

the instructions for many of the individual annexes. Also, the Adaptive 

Planning and Execution manual, in keeping with the Secretary of 

Defense’s memorandum requirements, requires the expansion of the 

Annex W, the operational contract support annex, in operation plans to 

include appendixes on (1) estimates of contracting capabilities and 

capacities support, (2) a contractor management plan, and (3) estimates 

of contractor support. As stated in the recently revised Joint Strategic 

Capabilities Plan, operational contract support planning is now required in 

much greater detail because of the volume of participation and resulting 

lessons learned in current operations.

Additionally, the Joint Staff is drafting the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of 

Staff Manual 4300.01, which will include information on integrating 

operational contract support in joint logistics planning.20 Specifically, the 

manual will assist logistics planners in developing procedures and 

guidance for a logistics planning process that effectively integrates, 

synchronizes, prioritizes, and focuses joint logistics capabilities on 

achieving a supported commander’s operational objectives and desired 

effects for various types of plans, including contingency plans, tasked in 

the Joint Strategic Capabilities Plan or as directed by the combatant 

commander. The Joint Staff’s revisions will include setting minimum 

requirements for operational contract support by plan level and providing 

templates and tools for planners to use to estimate contractor support and 

contracting capabilities. DOD officials stated that this manual will be 

 

19See Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Manual 3130.03, Adaptive Planning and 

Execution (APEX) Planning Formats and Guidance (Oct. 18, 2012).

20Draft Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Manual 4300.01, Planning Joint Logistics 

Support. 
 

Page 15 GAO-13-212 Warfighter Support

published following revisions to the Logistics Supplement to the Joint 

Strategic Capabilities Plan, expected by the end of 2012.

Finally, OSD has drafted an action plan, in conjunction with the Joint Staff 

and military services, that will establish operational contract support 

objectives and performance measures in the department’s attempt to fully 

institutionalize operational contract support by the end of fiscal year 2016. 

Specifically, the draft action plan identifies major actions and the 

projected cost to institutionalize operational contract support capabilities 

and capacity across the doctrine, organization, training, materiel, 

leadership and education, personnel, facilities and policy spectrum.21 It 

identifies timelines and lead organizations for specified tasks to help 

guide operational contract support planning and programming initiatives 

required to resolve urgent capability gaps. DOD officials stated that they 

expect the draft of the action plan to be approved by January 2013.

The military services, with the exception of the Army, have not issued 

comprehensive guidance to enable the integration of operational contract 

support into their planning efforts, thus limiting the institutionalization of 

operational contract support at the service level. Joint Publication 4-10, 

issued in 2008, notes that each military service, under its respective 

military department, is responsible for planning and executing contracting 

support to its forces, unless otherwise directed by the combatant 

commander.22 Joint Publication 4-10 also notes that the military services 

are responsible for integrating identified contract requirements into 

training.23 Further, the Secretary of Defense’s January 2011 

memorandum also directs the military services to take certain actions, 

which could improve how they plan for and use operational contract 

support.

 

21DOD intends to use the draft action plan to guide and measure how it closes specific 

critical capability gaps related to operational contract support, which are listed in the plan 

by priority.

22See Joint Pub. 4-10, at II-7 (Oct. 17, 2008).

23See id. at II-8. Similarly, DOD regulations and guidance require the secretaries of the 

military departments to incorporate elements of operational contract support policy and 

procedures, conveyed in that guidance, into applicable policy, doctrine, programming, 

training, and operations. See 32 C.F.R. § 158.5(k); DODI 3020.41, encl. 4, para. 11 (Dec. 

20, 2011). 

The Military Services, with 

the Exception of the Army, 

Have Not Issued 

Comprehensive Guidance 

on Integrating Operational 

Contract Support
 

Page 16 GAO-13-212 Warfighter Support

In large part because of the Army’s leading role in the major 

contingencies over the past decade that required it to employ operational 

contract support, the Army has issued guidance and created various 

organizations for integrating contract support into its planning and for 

developing related training. The Secretary of the Army established an 

independent panel, known as the Gansler Commission, which issued a 

final report in October 2007 that highlighted issues and needs for better 

military operations and cited critical deficiencies in the Army’s contracting 

and contract management.24 Since that report’s issuance, the Army has 

made it a priority to address highlighted deficiencies in areas such as 

guidance and training. In particular, the Army has issued service-specific 

guidance for integrating contract support into the service. For example, 

the Army issued Army Regulation 715-9 in 2011 that provides guidance 

regarding planning and managing operational contract support for the 

nonacquisition force, such as operational commanders or contracting 

officer’s representatives.25 It describes responsibilities, policy, and 

implementing procedures for operational contract support. Specifically, 

the regulation describes, among other things, planning, requirements 

definition, and oversight in the context of contracted support. For 

example, the regulation notes that, in general, contracted support will be 

utilized after full consideration of all sources of support, including 

deployable civilians.26 The Army also developed a manual containing 

tactics, techniques, and procedures for operational contract support.27

The manual provides “how to” guidance about operational contract 

support for Army operational commanders and their nonacquisition officer 

staff. In addition, the manual describes the roles of Army officials and 

organizations regarding operational contract support and serves as the 

primary reference document for execution of operational contract support 

planning, integration, and oversight tasks provided in other guidance, 

 

24Commission on Army Acquisition and Program Management in Expeditionary 

Operations, Urgent Reform Required: Army Expeditionary Contracting (Oct. 31, 2007). 

The Secretary of the Army established an independent Commission on Army Acquisition 

and Program Management in Expeditionary Operations to review the lessons learned in 

recent operations and provide forward-looking recommendations to ensure that future 

military operations achieve greater effectiveness, efficiency, and transparency.

25Army Regulation 715-9, Operational Contract Support Planning and Management (June 

20, 2011).

26See id., § 2-1(a). 

27Army Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures No. 4-10 (FM 3-100.21), “Operational 

Contract Support Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures” (June 20, 2011).

The Army Has Issued Guidance 

and Taken Several Actions to 

Integrate Operational Contract 

Support into Its Planning
 

Page 17 GAO-13-212 Warfighter Support

including Army Regulation 715-9. Moreover, the manual contains 

checklists that include considerations related to operational contract 

support. Furthermore, in direct response to the Gansler Commission 

report, the Army created the Army Contracting Command in 2008, which 

performs the majority of the contracting work for the Army, including 

assisting in operational contract support planning needs, training 

development, and execution.28 Other Army entities, along with DOD’s 

Defense Acquisition University, have developed and are implementing 

additional operational contract support training initiatives. Key Army 

training initiatives include the following:

• The Expeditionary Contracting Command, a subordinate to the Army 

Contracting Command, provides contracting support to the Army and 

other federal organizations at installations outside of the United 

States. Additionally, the Expeditionary Contracting Command has 

seven contracting support brigades that provide direct support to 

Army service component commanders, including providing 

predeployment contingency contracting unit training, which includes 

training contracting officers’ representatives.

• The Assistant Secretary of the Army (Acquisition, Logistics and 

Technology) Integration Office works with other entities including the 

Expeditionary Contracting Command to develop collective and 

individual training standards and material for acquisition and 

nonacquisition personnel involved with the planning, requirements 

definition, contracting, and management of operational contract 

support. Also, the integration office oversees the incorporation of 

planning of operational contract support for brigade-level training.

 

28Army Contracting Command, a major subordinate command within the Army Materiel 

Command designated as a two-star billet, provides theater support contracting services to 

deployed Army forces and systems contracting support to Army program executive 

officers and program managers. It also provides contracting services to garrison 

operations through its two subordinate commands, the Expeditionary Contracting 

Command and the Mission and Installation Contracting Command. The Army Contracting 

Command also provides reach-back contracting support from its continental United States 

contracting centers. The Expeditionary Contracting Command provides trained and ready 

forces for theater support contracting for Army deployed forces and garrison contracting 

for Army installations outside the continental United States. The Mission and Installation 

Contracting Command provides contracting support related to continental United States 

installations. All active-component Army contracting modular commands, units, and teams

serve under the Expeditionary Contracting Command; these units train at Mission and 

Installation Contracting Command and Expeditionary Contracting Command installation 

contracting offices when not deployed. 
 

Page 18 GAO-13-212 Warfighter Support

• The Army Contracting Command, along with other entities, developed 

and launched enhanced training of contracting officer’s 

representatives through the Defense Acquisition University. This 

course assists with deploying more prepared and trained contracting 

officer’s representatives into contingencies.29

Finally, according to statements of senior Army officials before the 

Commission on Wartime Contracting, the Assistant Secretary of the Army 

(Acquisition, Logistics and Technology) chartered the Operational 

Contracting Support and Policy Directorate in December 2009.30 As 

described in an Army briefing, this directorate develops, issues, manages, 

and measures the effectiveness of policies regarding operational contract 

support. According to the briefing, it provides strategic contract 

management and oversight of the U.S. Central Command Joint Theater 

Support Contracting Command, an organization that provides theater 

contracting support to the combined joint operations area of Afghanistan. 

The directorate provides oversight of contingency contracting operations 

in Iraq and Afghanistan as the focal point for the Army for contracting intheater. According to the briefing, among other activities, such as 

validation of operational contract support in doctrine, organization, 

training, materiel, leadership, and personnel considerations, members of 

the directorate also serve on DOD’s Operational Contract Support 

Functional Capabilities and Integration Board. In addition, this directorate, 

along with the Army’s other efforts, assists the Army in meeting the 

operational contract support requirements in both Joint Publication 4-10 

and the Secretary of Defense’s January 2011 memorandum.

 

29Contracting officer’s representatives are generally military or civilian DOD nonacquisition 

personnel that have acquisition-related responsibilities, such as helping to manage and 

oversee contracts by acting as the eyes and the ears of DOD’s contracting officers and by 

serving as the liaisons between the contractor, the contracting officer, and the unit 

receiving support or services. Contracting officer’s representatives have no authority to 

make any commitments or changes that affect price, quality, quantity, delivery, or other 

terms and conditions of a contract.

30According to Army officials, this directorate is now named the Expeditionary Contracting 

Support Plans and Policy Directorate, as of September 2012. 
 

Page 19 GAO-13-212 Warfighter Support

While the Army has established guidance and taken several steps to 

integrate operational contract support within its service, the other services 

have not taken similar actions to incorporate operational contract support 

into their planning. Joint Publication 4-10 and the Secretary of Defense’s 

January 2011 memorandum require the military departments to take 

certain steps that could improve how they plan for and use operational 

contract support. While the Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force have 

developed some training and other efforts to improve the planning and 

use of operational contract support, they have not developed servicespecific guidance detailing how operational contract support will be 

integrated into each of their services’ planning and execution efforts for 

contingency operations. Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force officials told 

us that they generally do not have a major role in operational contract 

support because the Army has been the lead service for contracting in 

present conflicts.

Navy officials acknowledged that some sailors need to understand the 

role that operational contract support plays in their deployed locations. As 

a result, Navy officials have included information about operational 

contract support in logistics training, which provides a basic overview of 

contract execution. However, as acknowledged by Navy officials, the 

Navy has not issued guidance that includes information regarding roles 

and responsibilities for ensuring better execution of planning, integration, 

and oversight of operational contract support within the service. Marine 

Corps officials acknowledged that the Marine Corps has also not issued 

service-wide, specific operational contract support guidance,31 although 

they explained that the service’s role in the Afghanistan and Iraq 

contingencies showed that operational contract support was important 

and that the Marine Corps needed specific, related training. In 

Afghanistan, the Marine Corps established two operational contract 

support cells, which have managed contract support and managementrelated activities for the service and provided oversight of operational 

contract support training to relevant personnel. In addition, a 2009 Marine 

Corps reference publication on contingency contracting contains doctrinal 

information for commanders and their staff members to plan for and 

obtain contracting support when deployed. While this information is 

helpful to commanders and their staff to understand the process for 

 

31Although Marine Corps officials did not identify any service-wide guidance, they 

discussed the use in Afghanistan of standard operating procedures for the Operational 

Contract Support Branch of the Marine Expeditionary Forces in-theater.

The Navy, Marine Corps, and 

Air Force Have Not Issued 

Comprehensive Guidance for 

Integrating Operational 

Contract Support into Their 

Planning
 

Page 20 GAO-13-212 Warfighter Support

contingency contracting, the document does not comprehensively 

describe how the Marine Corps plans to integrate operational contract 

support throughout the service. Further, as part of planning before 

deployment, the Marine Corps identified and trained contracting officer’s 

representatives prior to their deployment. Additionally, officials told us that 

the Marine Corps has begun to include some operational contract support 

in training in areas such as on regulations related to contracting. While 

the Marine Corps has incorporated some operational contract support in 

predeployment planning, the training is limited and, according to Marine 

Corps officials, it is at the commanders’ discretion to include it into their 

units’ training. According to Marine Corps officials, the Marine Corps has 

not provided guidance detailing the roles and responsibilities for 

nonacquisition personnel on how operational contract support will be 

integrated into the Marine Corps’ planning and execution efforts for 

contingency operations. Since training often changes, there is no 

permanent enforcement to maintain competencies of operational contract 

support, such as contractor oversight, into planning or training within the 

Marine Corps, thus limiting full institutionalization of operational contract 

support. 

Air Force officials acknowledged that the Air Force has not developed 

service-wide guidance regarding the integration of operational contract 

support within the service. The guidance that officials did identify is 

focused on the role of contracting officer’s representatives and actions for 

deployed commanders and contingency contracting officers to take during 

initial deployment (such as establishing shelter requirements and other 

needs of the unit). GAO identified similar acquisition-related implementing 

guidance related to basic contingency contracting actions during phases 

of an operation as well as implementing guidance regarding review of 

operation plans for contractor support integration plans, contractor 

management plans, and other contracting considerations. However, these 

documents do not comprehensively describe how the Air Force plans to 

integrate operational contract support throughout the service. Further, it is 

not clear how familiar officials are with these documents, as they were not 

mentioned during the course of discussions. The Air Force’s current 

training related to operational contract support is limited to the contract 

familiarization training provided to the contracting officer’s 

representatives, which is typical of training provided to contracting 

officer’s representatives in all services. As a result, the integration of 

operational contract support throughout the Air Force’s planning is limited 

because, as acknowledged by Air Force officials, the Air Force has not 

issued comprehensive guidance explaining the roles and responsibilities 
 

Page 21 GAO-13-212 Warfighter Support

for the execution of planning, integration, and oversight of operational 

contract support within the service.

Thus, while the Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force have developed some 

training and other individual efforts to familiarize servicemembers with 

operational contract support, these services have not issued 

comprehensive guidance to assist in fully institutionalizing operational 

contract support. DOD and service officials told us that they do not need 

to plan for operational contract support in advance because the Army has 

been the lead service in recent conflicts. However, according to DOD, the 

Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force spent over a billion dollars combined 

for contracted services in Afghanistan in fiscal year 2011, and therefore 

contracted support has been utilized for which planning should have

occurred. Without specific service-wide guidance to help institutionalize 

operational contract support, the other services may not fully understand 

their role in operational contract support and may not be prepared to 

execute operational contract support in the future—when it is possible 

that one of these services, instead of the Army, will play a leading role. 

Further, unless the services’ guidance describes how each service plans 

to integrate operational contract support into each organization—including 

planning for contingency operations and training—the other services’ 

planning efforts may not reflect the full extent of the use of contract 

support and the attendant cost and requirements for oversight.
 

Page 22 GAO-13-212 Warfighter Support

The combatant commands and their components have begun to 

incorporate operational contract support into their planning,32 but they 

have not fully integrated operational contract support into their planning 

for contingencies. While the combatant commands and their components 

have taken steps to integrate operational contract support into

contingency planning, mostly in the area of logistics, they are not planning 

for such support across all areas—such as intelligence and 

communications—that are likely to use contractors in future 

contingencies. We found that DOD’s efforts to fully integrate operational 

contract support at the command and component levels are hindered by 

not training all planners about new operational contract support 

requirements, a lack of focus of operational contract support planners on 

areas beyond logistics, and not providing operational contract support 

planning expertise at the commands’ components.

The combatant commands and their components have taken some 

positive steps to integrate operational contract support in their planning 

processes. According to DOD officials, at the time of this review, there 

were 95 plans with 45 approved Annex Ws. In addition, our current review 

of selected operation plans at each of the combatant commands found 

that officials are now including planning assumptions about operational 

contract support within either the base plan or Annex W. For example, in 

a draft humanitarian assistance and foreign disaster response plan that 

we reviewed, officials at Southern Command had included an Annex W 

that integrated assumptions for operational contract support. Similarly, 

officials incorporated assumptions for operational contract support in 

operation base plans and Annex Ws that we examined at Central 

Command, Pacific Command, Africa Command, and European 

Command. This integration of operational contract support is an 

improvement from February 2010 when we found that only 4 of 89 

operation plans had approved Annex Ws.

Also, the Joint Staff has developed training for logistics officials at the 

combatant commands and components to better understand how to 

integrate operational contract support into their planning processes. The 

 

32A service component command, assigned to a combatant commander, consists of the 

service component commander and the service forces (such as individuals, units, 

detachments, and organizations, including the support forces) that have been assigned to 

that combatant commander.

Combatant 

Commands and 

Components Have 

Taken Positive Steps, 

but Face Challenges 

in Fully Integrating 

Operational Contract 

Support into Their 

Contingency Planning 

Processes 

The Combatant 

Commands and Their 

Components Have Taken 

Some Positive Steps to 

Integrate Operational 

Contract Support in Their 

Planning Processes
 

Page 23 GAO-13-212 Warfighter Support

Joint Staff’s training informs planners of requirements in the Guidance for 

the Employment of the Force that the combatant commands, together 

with their service components and relevant combat support agencies, 

plan for the integration of contracted support into all phases of military 

operations. The training also makes officials aware of the new 

requirement in the Joint Strategic Capabilities Plan that states that 

geographic combatant commands, together with their service 

components and logistics planners, will synchronize and integrate 

contracted support into military operations. According to U.S. Central 

Command officials, they have already begun to employ the new guidance 

shared with them during the training for developing the Annex W.

We also noted several other positive efforts to integrate operational 

contract support into planning. For example, the Defense Logistics 

Agency, at the request of the combatant commands, has assigned two 

expert planners from its Joint Contingency Acquisition Support Office to 

the logistics offices at each combatant command to improve the 

incorporation of operational contract support into combatant command 

plans.33 Also, U.S. Africa Command has developed its own instruction to 

help the command integrate operational contract support into its planning 

process.34

 

33The Joint Contingency Acquisition Support Office assists with operational contract 

support program management across DOD. When requested, the Joint Contingency 

Acquisition Support Office provides to the DOD combatant command commanders a 

deployable operational contract support capability to effectively and efficiently coordinate 

operational contract support program activities. 

34United States Africa Command Instruction 4800.01A, Operational Contract Support 

(OCS) (May 1, 2012).
 

Page 24 GAO-13-212 Warfighter Support

While the combatant commands and their components have taken steps 

to integrate operational contract support into contingency planning, mostly 

in the area of logistics, they are not planning for such support across all 

areas—such as intelligence and communications—that are likely to use 

contractors in future contingencies. Under regulations and DOD 

Instruction 3020.41, when officials anticipate the need for contractor 

personnel and equipment to support military operations, military planners 

are directed to develop orchestrated, synchronized, detailed, and fully 

developed contract support integration plans and contractor management 

plans as components of concept plans and operational plans in 

accordance with appropriate strategic planning guidance.35 The 

regulations and instruction also state that plans should contain additional 

contract support guidance, as appropriate, in applicable annexes and 

appendixes within the respective plans.36 Our previous work has shown 

that DOD has typically relied on contractors in areas beyond logistics, and 

thus we have emphasized the importance of the up-front planning for their 

use across all functional areas.37

A Joint Staff official indicated that, in 2011, the Joint Staff added a 

requirement to incorporate planning for operational contract support in the 

base plan and Annex W of all operation plans; but the official noted that 

requirement did not include incorporating operational contract support in 

the nonlogistics annexes of plans. In a briefing document on changes and 

anticipated changes to strategic and planning guidance, the Joint Staff 

suggested that, among other things, planners would be required to 

include assumptions for the use of contractor support in paragraph one of 

the base plan and provide estimates of contractors in the Annex W. 

Although the combatant commands and their components have 

integrated operational contract support in the base plans and Annex Ws 

we reviewed, they did not, at the time we reviewed their plans, have 

more-specific and comprehensive guidance within the key operations 

planning system manual for integrating planning for operational contract 

 

35See 32 C.F.R. § 158.6(b); DODI 3020.41, encl. 2, para. 2 (Dec. 20, 2011). According to 

the regulations and instruction, concept plans without time-phased force and deployment 

data and operations orders are to contain contractor support integration plan–like and 

contractor management plan–like guidance to the extent necessary, as determined by the 

combatant commander. See id.

36See § 158.6(b)(1); DODI 3020.41, encl. 2, para. 2(a) (Dec. 20, 2011).

37GAO-10-472. 

Combatant Commands and 

Components Did Not Plan 

for the Potential Use of 

Contractors in All Areas 

Where They Might Be 

Needed, and Have 

Recently Been Issued 

Guidance
 

Page 25 GAO-13-212 Warfighter Support

support across all functional areas where contractors might be used. As a 

result, officials working in areas outside of logistics were not integrating 

operational contract support into their respective sections of plans. For 

example, nonlogistics officials at Central Command—such as those in the 

communications (Annex K) and intelligence (Annex B) divisions—stated 

that they do not plan for operational contract support in their respective 

annexes although contract support had been utilized in the past in these 

areas. Similarly, at Southern Command, we found that operational 

contract support was incorporated in Annex D (logistics) and Annex W 

(operational contract support), but its Annex Ks (communications) and 

Annex Bs (intelligence) did not directly contain considerations for 

operational contract support. Moreover, nonlogistics officials at Africa 

Command stated that they did not incorporate considerations of 

operational contract support in annexes other than Annex W. Some 

nonlogistics officials at Central Command further stated that they tend to 

assume the logistics planners will address the need to incorporate 

operational contract support throughout operation plans, but we found 

that this was not occurring. Finally, nonlogistics officials at Pacific 

Command stated that they had also used contracted support in past 

operations but believed they did not need to plan for operational contract 

support until a contingency was under way.

The Under Secretary of Defense for Policy completed revisions in April 

2011 to include broad language in the Guidance for the Employment of 

the Force requiring that the combatant commands plan for the integration 

of contracted support and contractor management in all phases of military 

operations. However, the Joint Staff only recently issued in October 2012 

the Adaptive Planning and Execution manual that calls on functional 

planners beyond the logistics area alone to identify major support 

functions planned for commercial support sourcing. As a result, the effect 

of this new manual remains to be determined. Until all functional area 

planners begin to integrate operational contract support into their 

respective sections of plans, the combatant commands and their 

components risk being unprepared to fully plan for the use of contractors 

in contingencies. Without plans that adequately consider the use of 

contract support in areas beyond logistics, DOD has an increased risk of 

being unprepared to manage deployed contractor personnel and services

and to provide necessary oversight during contingencies.
 

Page 26 GAO-13-212 Warfighter Support

As previously discussed, the Joint Staff J-4 has developed training on the 

requirements for planning for operational contract support at the 

combatant commands and their components, but, up to this point, this 

training has been focused on planners only in the logistics area and not 

on planners in all functional areas. Joint Staff J-4 officials stated that they 

are developing an operational contract support planning and execution 

training course to train all strategic and operational planners on the 

specific requirements and complexities of planning for operational 

contract support in all functional areas and types of operations. However, 

this training has not been fully developed and implemented. According to 

regulations and DOD guidance, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff 

will incorporate, where appropriate, program management and elements 

of the operational contract support guidance into joint training.38 Further, 

according to the Secretary of Defense’s January 2011 memorandum, the 

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff shall sustain ongoing efforts and 

initiate new efforts to institutionalize processes, tools, and doctrine that 

facilitate and strengthen planning for operational contract support and, by 

extension, joint operational contract support training, exercises, and 

execution.

Although the Joint Staff has developed new training for planning for 

operational contact support, this training is not focused on training 

officials from functional areas other than logistics. According to a Joint 

Staff official, while the training was open to all planners, it was focused on 

training operational contract support planners on the new operational 

contract support requirements and guidance. With the lack of training 

across all functional areas, along with the absence, until recently, of 

more-specific and comprehensive joint operations planning guidance on 

including operational contract support in plans, we found that planning by

the combatant commands and their components included limited 

integration of operational contract support in areas where contracted 

support has been used, such as communications or intelligence. For 

example, some officials involved in intelligence and communications 

planning at Central Command acknowledged that, while contracted 

support has been used in these areas in recent operations, they have not 

initially planned for the capability. In addition, in the operation plans that 

we reviewed at the various combatant commands, the potential use of 

contracted support was not mentioned in any of the nonlogistics annexes. 

 

38See 32 C.F.R. § 158.5(l)(1); DODI 3020.41, encl. 4, para. 12(a) (Dec. 20, 2011).

Joint Staff Training on 

Operational Contract 

Support to Commands and 

Components Is Focused on 

the Logistics Area
 

Page 27 GAO-13-212 Warfighter Support

In our previous work,39 we reported weaknesses in DOD’s planning for 

using contractors to support future military operations, and that DOD 

risked being unprepared to provide the management and oversight of 

contractor personnel deployed in contingencies. In this review, we found 

in some cases that officials outside of the logistics area were unaware of 

the planning requirements for operational contract support that are 

outlined in the Guidance for the Employment of the Force. Without 

training to incorporate operational contract support into all areas of their 

plans, the combatant commands and components risk not fully 

understanding the extent to which they will be relying on contractors to 

support combat operations outside of the logistics area and may be 

unprepared to provide the necessary management and oversight of 

deployed contractor personnel. Until DOD takes steps to address these 

gaps, it may be limited in its ability to fully institutionalize operational 

contract support in planning for current and future contingency operations 

at both the combatant command and component levels—where the 

planning for specific operations generally occurs.

At the request of the combatant commands, the Defense Logistics 

Agency has assigned planners from its Joint Contingency Acquisition 

Support Office to assist all combatant commands with the integration of 

operational contract support into the commands’ planning. However, the 

two planners embedded within each combatant command are not 

integrated across all functional areas and are not always focused on 

working with the planners from all the functional directorates to integrate 

operational contract support in all areas of plans.

According to guidance from the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, 

OSD established the Joint Contingency Acquisition Support Office within 

the Defense Logistics Agency in July 2008 as one of several initiatives to 

respond to congressional mandates in the John Warner National Defense 

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007.40 As explained in the guidance, 

DOD viewed the act as requiring the department to adopt a preplanned 

 

39GAO-10-472. 

40See Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Notice 4130.01, Guidance for Combatant 

Commander Employment of Operational Contract Support Enabler—Joint Contingency 

Acquisition Support Office (JCASO), encl. A, para. 1 (Dec. 20, 2011) (hereinafter cited as 

CJCSN 4130.01 (Dec. 20, 2011)).

Planners Are Aiding the 

Combatant Commands 

with Operational Contract 

Support, but They Are Not 

Focused on Working with 

All Planners throughout 

the Commands
 

Page 28 GAO-13-212 Warfighter Support

organizational approach to program management and to provide a 

deployable team during contingency operations when requested, to 

ensure jointness and cross-service coordination.41 According to the 

guidance, the purpose of the Joint Contingency Acquisition Support Office 

is to help synchronize, integrate, and manage the implementation and 

execution of operational contract support among diverse communities in 

support of U.S. government objectives during peacetime and contingency 

operations.42 As envisioned by the guidance, the planners of the Joint 

Contingency Acquisition Support Office assigned to each combatant 

command would enable joint operational contract support planning and 

strengthen combatant commands’ planning for contingencies. 

Specifically, among other things, the guidance directs the Joint 

Contingency Acquisition Support Office, when requested, to

• provide resources and expertise to the combatant commands to 

conduct deliberate operational contract support planning, and 

establish and implement program management strategies to address 

and resolve operational contract support challenges;

• assist combatant commands in preparation of plans and orders by 

drafting, coordinating, and establishing Annex Ws; and

• participate in exercises, training, meetings, and conferences to 

integrate and advance operational contract support across DOD.

All planners from the Joint Contingency Acquisition Support Office have 

been organizationally placed within the logistics directorate at each of the 

combatant commands. According to combatant command officials, these 

planners have helped to integrate operational contract support into 

combatant command planning through their participation in planning 

meetings, communication of new planning requirements for operational 

contract support to the combatant command planners, and the 

development—and sometimes the writing—of the Annex W for certain 

plans. However, because these planners are placed within the logistics 

 

41See id. In a 2008 report to Congress, DOD identified the provisions of the act codified at 

subsections 2333(c)(2) and (c)(3) of Title 10, U.S. Code, as the impetus for the creation of 

the Joint Contingency Contract Support Office, an organization later renamed the Joint 

Contingency Acquisition Support Office. See Department of Defense, Report to the 

Congress of the United States: Department of Defense Program for Planning, Managing, 

and Accounting for Contractor Services and Contractor Personnel During Contingency 

Operations (April 2008).

42CJCSN 4130.01, encl. A, para. 3 (Dec. 20, 2011).
 

Page 29 GAO-13-212 Warfighter Support

directorates, the planners are not integrated across all functional areas 

and are not always focused on working with all planners at the combatant 

commands to enable planning for the use of contracted support. Some 

planners, such as those at U.S. Southern Command, coordinate with 

combatant command planners from the nonlogistics areas and have 

helped these planners to become aware of operational contract support 

considerations. Other planners, such as those at U.S. Central Command, 

focus on integrating operational contract support into the logistics annex 

and Annex W sections of plans and are not involved in other areas such 

as communications or intelligence, which are areas that also have relied 

on contracted support in recent operations.

The Secretary of Defense’s January 2011 memorandum calls for better 

planning for contracted support at the strategic and operational levels. 

Further, our prior work on DOD’s development of contract support plans 

recommended that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff require 

personnel to address the potential need for contractor support where 

appropriate.43 In addition, the DOD guidance for combatant commander 

employment of the Joint Contingency Acquisition Support Office calls for 

the office, when requested, to embed planners from the Joint 

Contingency Acquisition Support Office within the combatant commands 

to enable joint operational contract support planning, and to integrate and 

synchronize operational contract support efforts across DOD and other 

partners.44 Without full coordination of the planners from the Joint 

Contingency Acquisition Support Office with all planners at the combatant 

commands to incorporate operational contract support into all areas of 

their plans, the combatant commands risk not fully understanding the 

extent to which they will be relying on contractors to support combat 

operations outside of the logistics area and may be unprepared to provide 

the necessary management and oversight of deployed contractor 

personnel. Until DOD takes steps to address these gaps, it may be limited 

in its ability to fully institutionalize operational contract support in planning 

for current and future contingency operations.

 

43GAO-10-472. 

44See CJCSN 4130.01, encl. A, para. 4(b)(2) (Dec. 20, 2011).
 

Page 30 GAO-13-212 Warfighter Support

While the Defense Logistics Agency, at the request of the combatant 

commands, has provided planning expertise to aid combatant commands 

in integrating operational contract support into planning, the combatant 

commands’ components have not been provided such expertise to aid 

them in meeting their operational contract support planning requirements.

As a result, the components face difficulties incorporating operational 

contract support considerations into their planning efforts. Two planners 

are assigned to each combatant command. After a combatant command 

plan is developed, it is sent to the combatant command’s components for 

those organizations to develop their own plans to support the combatant 

command’s requirements, including the requirements for the integration of 

operational contract support. For example, a component may be required 

to develop its own Annex W to support a combatant command’s Annex W 

within a particular plan. This level of planning is essential since 

components generally identify and provide the resources necessary to 

support the combatant command’s requirements in order to accomplish 

the mission of the specific operation.

Without this expertise, component planners are limited in their ability to 

integrate operational contract support into their plans to support 

combatant command requirements and, in some cases, are unaware of 

the overall requirements to integrate operational contract support into 

their planning as directed by the combatant commander. For example, 

some component officials with whom we met stated they were unfamiliar 

with the operational contract support planning requirements found in 

DOD’s strategic planning guidance such as the Guidance for the 

Employment of the Force. Some component officials also stated that they 

were not familiar with how to write an Annex W to support the combatant 

command requirements. There was consensus among the component 

officials whom we interviewed, as well as several combatant command 

officials, that the components would benefit from additional training or 

expertise in planning for operational contract support.

The Secretary of Defense’s memorandum regarding DOD’s 

implementation of operational contract support requires the Chairman of 

the Joint Chiefs of Staff to take various steps to improve operational 

contract support planning. In addition, as described by DOD guidance for 

the employment of the Joint Contingency Acquisition Support Office, 

combatant commands are responsible for strategic theater planning, and 

the joint force commander and component commands are responsible for 

Components Have Not 

Received Expertise Such 

as Provided to Combatant 

Commands to Integrate 

Operational Contract 

Support into Their 

Planning 
 

Page 31 GAO-13-212 Warfighter Support

operational planning.45 Further, the DOD guidance states that the Joint 

Contingency Acquisition Support Office’s mission is to bring its enabling 

capability to support planning activities at the strategic and operational 

levels. However, the Joint Staff has not acted to ensure that both the 

combatant commands and their components have planning expertise to 

address operational contract support in planning for operations. As a 

result, the components may not be able to fully integrate operational 

contract support into their planning for contingency operations; therefore, 

they may be unprepared to manage deployed contractor personnel and 

provide the necessary oversight.

The Secretary of Defense’s January 2011 memorandum, and several of 

the ongoing and recently completed efforts we have noted in this report, 

illustrate the department’s recognition of and commitment to integrating 

operational contract support throughout all aspects of military planning. 

While progress has been made at high levels within the department to 

emphasize an awareness of operational contract support, DOD has not 

yet fully institutionalized planning for operational contract support 

throughout the military services, or at the combatant commands or 

components where much of the operational planning occurs for 

contingencies. Although the Army has made strides in creating guidance 

and training on the importance of planning for operational contract

support because of the challenges it encountered in Iraq and Afghanistan, 

the other military services have not taken additional steps to develop and 

implement comprehensive guidance within each service to ensure the full 

institutionalization of operational contract support. Moreover, at the 

combatant commands and components, there is a lack of emphasis on 

training for all planners, operational contract support planners are not 

working with all planners, and expertise on operational contract support is 

not provided for component planners. As a result, these challenges hinder 

DOD’s ability to achieve the cultural change that we called for 2 years 

ago—a change that emphasizes an awareness of operational contract 

support throughout all entities of the department. Without a focus on 

recent changes in planning guidance and more training on incorporating 

operational contract support in all areas of operation plans—not just in the 

logistics area—DOD may face challenges to successfully plan for the use 

of contractors in critical areas such as intelligence and communications. 

 

45See CJCSN 4130.01, encl. A, para. 2 (Dec. 20, 2011).

Conclusions 
 

Page 32 GAO-13-212 Warfighter Support

Similarly, without the operational contract support planners assisting the 

commands with planning in all areas and without such expertise at the 

service component commands, DOD risks being unprepared to manage 

deployed contractor personnel and provide the necessary oversight in the 

next contingency.

To further the integration of operational contract support into all of the 

services’ planning, we recommend that the Secretary of Defense direct 

the Secretaries of the Navy and Air Force to provide comprehensive 

service-wide guidance for the Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force that 

describes how each service should integrate operational contract support 

into its respective organization to include planning for contingency 

operations.

To further the integration of operational contract support into all areas of 

the operation planning process, we recommend that the Secretary of 

Defense direct the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to focus its 

training about operational contract support, which is currently focused on 

the logistics planners, on training all planners at the combatant 

commands and components as necessary.

To further enable all planners at the combatant commands to integrate 

operational contract support into plans across their functional areas, we 

recommend that the Secretary of Defense direct the Chairman of the 

Joint Chiefs of Staff to identify and implement actions by the combatant 

commanders needed to ensure that planners from the Joint Contingency 

Acquisition Support Office supporting the combatant commands expand 

their focus to work with planners throughout all functional areas.

To enable the integration of operational contract support into service 

component command–level planning efforts, we recommend that the 

Secretary of Defense direct the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to 

work with the military services as necessary to improve the level of 

expertise in operational contract support for the combatant commands’ 

components.

Recommendations for 

Executive Action
 

Page 33 GAO-13-212 Warfighter Support

In written comments on a draft of this report, DOD concurred with three of 

our recommendations and partially concurred with one. DOD’s comments 

are reprinted in appendix II. DOD also provided technical comments 

which we have incorporated where appropriate.

DOD concurred with our recommendation that the Secretary of Defense 

direct the Secretaries of the Navy and the Air Force to provide 

comprehensive service-wide guidance for the Navy, Marine Corps, and 

Air Force that describes how each service should integrate operational 

contract support into its respective organization to include planning for 

contingency operations. DOD stated that the Marine Corps has made 

significant progress in integrating operational contract support into its 

warfighting capabilities. DOD noted that the Marine Corps uses Marine 

Corps Reference Publication 4-11E, “Contingency Contracting,” dated 

February 12, 2009, which it described as the service-wide guidance on 

contingency contracting support. According to DOD, this publication 

contains doctrine for commanders and their staff to plan for and obtain 

contracting support when deployed. DOD also noted that the Marine 

Corps has integrated operational contract support with respect to its 

primary mission, with a focus on support to the Marine Air Ground Task 

Force. While our report acknowledges the progress made by the services 

to integrate operational contract support into service training, as well as 

acknowledging the Marine Corps’ use of Marine Corps Reference 

Publication 4-11E, we believe that the Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force 

should develop comprehensive service-wide guidance to fully 

institutionalize operational contract support.

DOD also agreed with our recommendation that the Secretary of Defense 

direct the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to focus its training about 

operational contract support on training all planners at the combatant 

commands and components as necessary. DOD stated that the Joint 

Staff is working with the services and the geographic combatant 

commands to develop an appropriate training plan and gather the 

necessary resources to conduct operational contract support training. We 

agree that if fully implemented this action could address this 

recommendation.

DOD partially concurred with our recommendation that the Secretary of 

Defense direct the Director of the Defense Logistics Agency to identify 

and implement actions needed to ensure that planners from the Joint 

Contingency Acquisition Support Office expand their focus to work with 

planners throughout all functional areas at the combatant commands. 

DOD agreed with the thrust of our recommendation—the need for efforts 

Agency Comments 

and Our Evaluation
 

Page 34 GAO-13-212 Warfighter Support

to broaden the focus of planners from the Joint Contingency Acquisition 

Support Office as part of an effort to integrate operational contract 

support in combatant command planning. DOD stated, however, that the 

combatant commands—not the Joint Contingency Acquisition Support 

Office—are responsible for operational contract support planning across 

“all functional areas.” DOD also stated that, when requested, the Joint 

Contingency Acquisition Support Office operational contract support 

planners support combatant commands in meeting this planning 

requirement. DOD noted that the geographic combatant commanders are 

responsible for conducting the planning of their respective war plans, not 

the Defense Logistics Agency. Consequently, DOD stated that, to enable 

all planners at the combatant commands to integrate operational contract 

support into plans across their functional areas, the Secretary of Defense 

should direct the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to continue efforts 

to develop operational contract support planning capabilities and 

encourage the geographic combatant commanders to utilize the Joint 

Contingency Acquisition Support Office for planning. We recognize that 

the Joint Contingency Acquisition Support Office supports the combatant 

commands in their efforts to incorporate operational contract support

planning within their respective war plans, and that the individual 

combatant commanders are ultimately responsible for how they utilize 

embedded Joint Contingency Acquisition Support Office planners. We 

acknowledge that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is in a position 

to encourage the combatant commanders to utilize the Joint Contingency 

Acquisition Support Office planners. As such, we agree that the 

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff would be an appropriate official to 

implement our recommendation, and we have revised our 

recommendation accordingly. However, we continue to believe that the 

Defense Logistics Agency, which is responsible for the Joint Contingency 

Acquisition Support Office, must ensure that its planners are prepared to 

assist the combatant commanders in these efforts, when requested. Full 

implementation of the recommendation would therefore likely necessitate 

cooperation and coordination by the Defense Logistics Agency, the Joint 

Contingency Acquisition Support Office, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs 

of Staff, and the geographic combatant commands.

Finally, in concurring with our recommendation that the Secretary of 

Defense direct the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to work with the 

military services as necessary to improve the level of expertise in 

operational contract support for the combatant commands’ components, 

DOD stated that the Joint Staff is taking action to integrate operational 

contract support into the services’ component command-level planning 

efforts. DOD also stated that the Joint Staff is developing a Joint 
 

Page 35 GAO-13-212 Warfighter Support

Professional Military Education course that focuses on the planning and 

execution of operational contract support. DOD noted that this course is 

additive to other courses offered by Defense Acquisition University as 

well as courses offered by the U.S. Army Logistics University. According 

to DOD, the Joint Staff will continue to work with the other services on 

operational contract support issues. We agree that if DOD takes these 

actions, these efforts could address our recommendation.

We are sending copies of this report to the appropriate congressional 

committees and the Secretary of Defense. The report also is available at 

no charge on GAO’s website at http://www.gao.gov.

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

at (202) 512-5431 or russellc@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices of 

Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page 

of this report. Key contributors to this report are listed in appendix III. 

Sincerely yours,

Cary Russell

Director

Defense Capabilities and Management
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology

Page 36 GAO-13-212 Warfighter Support

To determine the extent to which the Department of Defense (DOD) is 

integrating planning for operational contract support through efforts of the 

Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD), Joint Staff, and military 

services, we collected and analyzed documentation such as planning 

guidance and policies related to the integration of operational contract 

support into DOD’s planning for contingency operations. Specifically, we 

analyzed the implementation of DOD guidance, such as Joint Publication 

4-10, the Secretary of Defense’s memorandum on Strategic and 

Operational Planning for Operational Contract Support and Workforce 

Mix, and related policies and instruction through discussions with officials 

from OSD and the Joint Staff to understand the various efforts to address 

the integration of operational contract support throughout the department. 

We reviewed and analyzed provisions from the Guidance for the 

Employment of the Force to understand the new requirements DOD has 

in place for planning for operational contract support in all phases of 

military operations. We also spoke with officials specifically focused on 

integrating operational contract support department-wide, such as officials 

from the Operational Contract Support Functional Capabilities Integration 

Board to obtain their perspective on the progress the department has 

made in integrating operational contract support as well as learning of 

related initiatives. We reviewed DOD guidance on the civilian 

expeditionary workforce and interviewed officials from OSD, the Joint 

Staff, the civilian expeditionary workforce program office, military 

services, and combatant commands to understand the intent and the 

status of the development of the civilian expeditionary workforce program. 

To determine how the military services have integrated operational 

contract support into their operations, we collected and analyzed servicespecific documentation related to operational contract support initiatives 

from each of the services and met with officials from the Army, Navy, 

Marine Corps, and Air Force. We also held discussions with officials from 

each of the services to gain an understanding of how each organization 

has implemented operational contract support. Further, we reviewed 

related GAO reports on operational contract support, as well as related 

reports issued by other agencies.

To determine the extent to which DOD is integrating planning for 

operational contract support in operations planning at the combatant 

commands and their components, we reviewed plans, such as operation 

and contingency plans, and other efforts, such as specific related 

guidance, to understand the commands’ and components’ 

implementation of requirements to integrate operational contract support. 

As mentioned above, we interviewed officials from OSD and the Joint 

Staff in order to assess the extent to which DOD has integrated 

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

Page 37 GAO-13-212 Warfighter Support

operational contract support requirements for planning in policies. We 

then spoke with officials from all of the geographic combatant commands 

(except Northern Command) and their components regarding their 

knowledge of the requirements and the extent to which they are planning 

for operational contract support. Additionally, we spoke to officials to gain 

knowledge about their current processes for planning for contingency 

operations. During our meetings with the combatant commands, we 

spoke with officials from various directorates, such as strategic plans, 

logistics, and intelligence, in order to obtain an understanding of the 

extent to which operational contract support is being planned for in the 

base plan and the directorates’ respective annexes. During our meetings 

we also reviewed sample operation plans and annexes to analyze the 

extent to which DOD has integrated operational contract support 

considerations in its contingency planning. To determine the level at 

which the combatant commands and components are integrating 

operational contract support into plans, we requested combatant 

command and component officials to provide sample operation plans that 

included base plans with operational contract support considerations, 

Annex Ws, and other functional area annexes that also contained 

operational contract support language. Further, we obtained and 

analyzed specific policies the combatant commands and service 

component commands had in place governing the planning for 

operational contract support in their contingency and operation plans.

Our review focused on DOD’s planning efforts and thus did not include an 

examination of how operational contract support is integrated in 

professional military education or in the execution of current operations.

We visited or contacted the following organizations during our review:

Department of Defense

• Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and 

Readiness, Washington, D.C.

• Civilian Expeditionary Workforce Program Office, Washington, 

D.C.

• Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, Washington, D.C.

• Force Development, Washington, D.C.

• Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (Program 

Support), Washington, D.C.
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology

Page 38 GAO-13-212 Warfighter Support

• Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology 

and Logistics

• Operational Contract Support Functional Capabilities Integration 

Board

• U.S. Africa Command, Stuttgart, Germany, and several of its service 

components

• U.S. Central Command, Tampa, Florida, and several of its service 

components

• U.S. European Command, Stuttgart, Germany, and several of its 

service components

• U.S. Pacific Command, Honolulu, Hawaii, and several of its service 

components

• U.S. Southern Command, Miami, Florida, and several of its service 

components

Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff

• Joint Staff J-4 (Logistics) Directorate, Washington, D.C.

Department of the Army

• Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology-Integration Office, Hopewell, 

Virginia

• G-43, Strategic Operations, Washington, D.C.

• Manpower and Reserve Affairs, Washington, D.C.

Department of the Navy

• U.S. Navy Headquarters, Washington, D.C.

• Navy Expeditionary Contracting Command, Little Creek, Virginia

• U.S. Marine Corps Headquarters, Washington, D.C.

Department of the Air Force

• U.S. Air Force Headquarters, Acquisition, Washington, D.C.

We conducted this performance audit from January 2012 to February

2013 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 this 

assessment based on our audit objectives. 
Appendix II: Comments from the Department 

of Defense

Page 39 GAO-13-212 Warfighter Support

Appendix II: Comments from the Department 

of Defense
Appendix II: Comments from the Department 

of Defense

Page 40 GAO-13-212 Warfighter Support
Appendix II: Comments from the Department 

of Defense

Page 41 GAO-13-212 Warfighter Support
Appendix II: Comments from the Department 

of Defense

Page 42 GAO-13-212 Warfighter Support
Appendix III: GAO Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgments

Page 43 GAO-13-212 Warfighter Support

Cary B. Russell, (202) 512-5431 or russellc@gao.gov

In addition to the contact named above, Alissa Czyz, Assistant Director; 

Marilyn Wasleski, Assistant Director; Hia Quach; Michael Shaughnessy; 

Yong Song; and Natasha Wilder made key contributions to this report. 

Richard Powelson and Amie Steele provided assistance in report 

preparation.

Appendix III: GAO Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgments 

GAO Contact

Staff 

Acknowledgments 
Related GAO Products

Page 44 GAO-13-212 Warfighter Support

Operational Contract Support: Sustained DOD Leadership Needed to 

Better Prepare for Future Contingencies. GAO-12-1026T. Washington, 

D.C.: September 12, 2012.

Iraq and Afghanistan: Agencies Are Taking Steps to Improve Data on 

Contracting but Need to Standardize Reporting. GAO-12-977R. 

Washington, D.C.: September 12, 2012.

Iraq and Afghanistan: State and DOD Should Ensure Interagency 

Acquisitions Are Effectively Managed and Comply with Fiscal Law. 

GAO-12-750. Washington, D.C.: August 2, 2012.

Contingency Contracting: Agency Actions to Address Recommendations 

by the Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan. 

GAO-12-854R. Washington, D.C.: August 1, 2012.

Defense Acquisition Workforce: Improved Processes, Guidance, and 

Planning Needed to Enhance Use of Workforce Funds. GAO-12-747R. 

Washington, D.C.: June 20, 2012.

Operational Contract Support: Management and Oversight Improvements 

Needed in Afghanistan. GAO-12-290. Washington, D.C.: March 29, 2012.

Acquisition Workforce: DOD’s Efforts to Rebuild Capacity Have Shown 

Some Progress. GAO-12-232T. Washington, D.C.: November 16, 2011.

Defense Contract Management Agency: Amid Ongoing Efforts to Rebuild 

Capacity, Several Factors Present Challenges in Meeting Its Missions. 

GAO-12-83. Washington, D.C.: November 3, 2011.

Defense Acquisition Workforce: Better Identification, Development, and 

Oversight Needed for Personnel Involved in Acquiring Services. 

GAO-11-892. Washington, D.C.: September 28, 2011.

Contingency Contracting: Improved Planning and Management Oversight 

Needed to Address Challenges with Closing Contracts. GAO-11-891. 

Washington, D.C.: September 27, 2011.

Iraq Drawdown: Opportunities Exist to Improve Equipment Visibility, 

Contractor Demobilization, and Clarity of Post-2011 DOD Role. 

GAO-11-774. Washington, D.C.: September 16, 2011.

Related GAO Products
Related GAO Products

Page 45 GAO-13-212 Warfighter Support

Warfighter Support: DOD Needs to Improve Its Planning for Using 

Contractors to Support Future Military Operations. GAO-10-472. 

Washington, D.C.: March 30, 2010.

Contingency Contracting: DOD, State, and USAID Continue to Face 

Challenges in Tracking Contractor Personnel and Contracts in Iraq and 

Afghanistan. GAO-10-1. Washington, D.C.: October 1, 2009.

Contingency Contract Management: DOD Needs to Develop and Finalize 

Background Screening and Other Standards for Private Security 

Contractors. GAO-09-351. Washington, D.C.: July 31, 2009.

Contingency Contracting: DOD, State, and USAID Contracts and 

Contractor Personnel in Iraq and Afghanistan. GAO-09-19. Washington, 

D.C.: October 1, 2008.

Defense Management: DOD Needs to Reexamine Its Extensive Reliance 

on Contractors and Continue to Improve Management and Oversight. 

GAO-08-572T. Washington, D.C.: March 11, 2008.

(351692)
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 website (http://www.gao.gov). Each weekday 

afternoon, GAO posts on its website newly released reports, testimony, 

and correspondence. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted 

products, go to http://www.gao.gov and select “E-mail Updates.”

The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO’s actual cost of 

production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the 

publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black and 

white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO’s website, 

http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm. 

Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or 

TDD (202) 512-2537. 

Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card, 

MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional information.

Connect with GAO on Facebook, Flickr, Twitter, and YouTube. 

Subscribe to our RSS Feeds or E-mail Updates. Listen to our Podcasts. 

Visit GAO on the web at www.gao.gov. 

Contact:

Website: http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470

Katherine Siggerud, Managing Director, siggerudk@gao.gov, (202) 512-

4400, U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 

7125, Washington, DC 20548

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

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

Washington, DC 20548

GAO’s Mission

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony 

Order by Phone

Connect with GAO

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs

Congressional 

Relations 

Public Affairs

Please Print on Recycled Paper.