Page 1 GAO-12-565R DOD Financial Management

United States Government Accountability Office

Washington, DC 20548

March 30, 2012

The Honorable Howard P. “Buck” McKeon

Chairman

The Honorable Adam Smith

Ranking Member

Committee on Armed Services

House of Representatives

The Honorable K. Michael Conaway

House of Representatives

The Honorable Robert Andrews

House of Representatives

Subject: DOD Financial Management: Reported Status of Department of Defense’s 

Enterprise Resource Planning Systems1

In October 2010, we reported on the status of the Department of Defense’s (DOD) 

enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems.

2 In that report, we noted that several of 

these systems were not being implemented on schedule and within budget, 

necessitating the extended use and funding of existing, duplicative, stove-piped 

systems. DOD considers the successful implementation of these systems critical to 

transforming its business operations and addressing long-standing weaknesses in 

areas such as financial and supply chain management. DOD officials also stated 

that these systems are critical to ensuring the department meets its mandated 

September 30, 2017, goal to have auditable consolidated financial statements.

3 As

agreed with your staff, our objective was to provide updated information on DOD’s 

reported status for each of these ERP systems as of December 31, 2011. 

 

1

An ERP system is an automated system using commercial off-the-shelf software consisting of 

multiple, integrated functional modules that perform a variety of business-related tasks such as 

general ledger accounting, payroll, and supply chain management. 

2

GAO, DOD Business Transformation: Improved Management Oversight of Business System 

Modernization Efforts Needed, GAO-11-53 (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 7, 2010).

3

See National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010, Pub. L. No. 111-84, div. A, § 1003(a), 

(b), 123 Stat. 2190, 2439-40 (Oct. 28, 2009). 

 
Page 2 GAO-12-565R DOD Financial Management

To address the objective, we obtained and reviewed data and supporting 

documentation on the updated status of each ERP provided by DOD for 

completeness and consistency. In certain instances, we compared the information to 

what we previously reported in October 20104 to identify inconsistencies, if any, and 

contacted DOD officials to reconcile any identified discrepancies. We did not validate 

the data provided by the department, nor evaluate the implications of any changes in 

DOD’s reported status information on its ability to achieve its September 30, 2017, 

auditability goal. We conducted our work from December 2011 through March 2012

in accordance with all sections of GAO’s Quality Assurance Framework that are 

relevant to our objectives. The framework requires that we plan and perform the 

engagement to obtain sufficient and appropriate evidence to meet our stated 

objectives and to discuss any limitations in our work. We believe that the information 

and data obtained, and the analysis conducted, provide a reasonable basis for any 

findings and conclusions in this product. 

We requested DOD provide an update as of December 31, 2011, on specific data 

elements—such as the current life-cycle cost estimate and the number of system 

users—for each ERP system that DOD identified as essential to transforming its 

business operations identified in our October 2010 report.

5 A list of the ERPs is 

provided in enclosure I and a list of these data elements is included in enclosure II. 

DOD’s reported status of each ERP system is provided in enclosure III. 

Agency Comments 

We requested comments on a draft of this report from DOD. DOD provided technical 

comments related to the information provided on the status of each ERP system, 

which we considered and incorporated as appropriate. 

-----

We are sending copies of this report to the appropriate congressional committees. 

We are also sending copies to the Secretary of Defense; the Secretary of the Army; 

the Secretary of the Navy; the Secretary of the Air Force; the Deputy Secretary of 

Defense; Director, Defense Logistics Agency; the Deputy Chief Management Officer; 

the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller); the Under Secretary of the Army, the 

Under Secretary of the Navy, and the Under Secretary of the Air Force, in their 

capacity as the Chief Management Officer of their respective service; and the 

program management office for each business system that is included in the report. 

This report also is available at no charge on the GAO website at http://www.gao.gov.

If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please contact me at (202) 

512–9869 or khana@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices of Congressional 

 

4

GAO-11-53.

5

GAO-11-53.
Page 3 GAO-12-565R DOD Financial Management

Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page of this report. GAO staff 

who made key contributions to this report are listed in enclosure IV. 

Asif A. Khan

Director, Financial Management and Assurance

Enclosures - 4 
Page 4 GAO-12-565R DOD Financial Management

Enclosure I

We obtained DOD’s reported status as of December 31, 2011, for the following 

ERPs.

General Fund Enterprise Business System (GFEBS)

Army

Global Combat Support System-Army (GCSS-Army)

Logistics Modernization Program (LMP) 

Integrated Personnel and Pay System-Army (IPPS-A) 

Navy Enterprise Resource Planning System (Navy ERP)

Navy

Global Combat Support System-Marine Corps (GCSS-MC)

Integrated Pay and Personnel System-Navy (IPPS-Navy)

Defense Enterprise Accounting and Management System (DEAMS)

Air Force

Expeditionary Combat Support System (ECSS)

Air Force-Integrated Personnel and Pay System (AF-IPPS)

Defense Agencies Initiative (DAI)

Defense Logistics Agency (DLA)

Enterprise Business System (EBS)1

 

1

We did not include information on the DLA’s EBS in this report. According to DLA officials, this ERP 

system was fully deployed to over 15,000 system users in July 2007 and is in sustainment.
Page 5 GAO-12-565R DOD Financial Management

Enclosure II

The following is a list of the specific data elements that we requested DOD provide 

an updated status as of December 31, 2011, for each of the ERPs. 

• program owner; 

• a description of the functionality that each system is intended to provide;

• the annual dollar value that each system is intended to control and for which it 

is intended to account;

• the date that each program was initiated;

• the originally scheduled date for the full deployment of each system;1

• the actual (or most recently estimated) scheduled date for the full deployment 

of each system and the reasons for any reported schedule slippage; 

• the original life-cycle cost estimate for each system;2

• the current life-cycle cost estimate for each system and the reasons for any 

reported life-cycle cost increases;

• the reported amount expended for each system;

• the reported number of system users for each system as of December 31, 

2011, and the expected number of users for each system when fully 

deployed; 

• the reported number of locations in which each system operates as of 

December 31, 2011, and expected number of locations in which each system 

will operate when fully deployed;

• the reported number of legacy systems to be replaced by each system;

• the reported annual cost to operate and maintain the legacy systems to be 

replaced by the ERPs; and

• the reported number of system interfaces.3

 

1

With respect to the acquisition of a large information system like an ERP, full deployment means the 

fielding of an increment of the program in accordance with the terms of a full deployment decision—

the final decision authorizing an increment of the program to deploy software for operational use. The 

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010, Pub. L. No. 111-84, div. A, § 841, 123 Stat. 

2190, 2418 (Oct. 28, 2009), directed that the terminology be changed from full operational capability 

to full deployment. 

2

A life-cycle cost estimate provides an accounting of all resources and associated cost elements 

required to develop, produce, deploy, and sustain a particular program. The life-cycle cost estimate 

encompasses all past, present, and future costs for every aspect of the program, regardless of 

funding source.

3

An interface is a connection between two devices, applications, or networks or a boundary across 

which two systems communicate.
Enclosure III

DOD’s Reported Status as of December 31, 2011

Program timeline

• Initiation date October 2004

• Original scheduled date of full deployment

a

Fiscal year 2011

• Current scheduled date of full deployment

a

July 2012

Program costs

b

• Original life-cycle cost estimate $1.4 billion

• Current life-cycle cost estimate

a

$1.4 billion

• Amount expended $764 million

Program deployment details

c

• Current number of system users 38,050

• Expected number of system users at full

deployment

52,000d

• Current number of locations using system 180

• Expected number of locations at full deployment 227

• Legacy systems to be replaced 107

• Annual cost of legacy systems $58 million

• Number of system interfaces 46

Source: DOD’s GFEBS Program Management Office and historical data as reported in 

GAO-11-53. 

Note: These data have not been validated. 

a

As previously reported by DOD and described in GAO-11-53.

b

According to program officials, the schedule slippage was due to changes in the 

functional design, Logistics Modernization Program delays, natural disasters in Haiti and 

Japan, and the reorganization of several Army Commands and Districts.

c

Data as of September 30, 2011.

d

According to program officials, upon full deployment of GFEBS, there will be 

approximately 15,000-18,000 additional budget planning and execution reporting users. 

1

According to the GFEBS program officials, the Army Corps of Engineers will continue to 

use its existing financial system, the Corps of Engineers Financial Management System; 

but once GFEBS is fully operational, the Army will assess the feasibility of GFEBS 

becoming the system of record for the Corps of Engineers.

Program Owner

Assistant Secretary for Financial 

Management and Comptroller, 

Army

Functionality

GFEBS is intended to provide a 

transaction-driven General 

Ledger for the Army’s general 

fund;

1 prevalidation of obligations 

prior to disbursement; financial 

management capabilities such as 

online analysis and real-time 

ad hoc reporting functionality; and 

an automated audit trail to trace 

all transactions to their sources. 

GFEBS will support all 

components of the Army—Active, 

Reserve, and National Guard. 

Annual Dollar Value Intended 

to Control and Account

On an annual basis, GFEBS will 

be used to manage about $140

billion of obligation authority. 

General Fund Enterprise Business System

(GFEBS) 

Page 6 GAO-12-565R DOD Financial Management
Enclosure III

DOD’s Reported Status as of December 31, 2011

Program timeline

• Initiation date December 2003

• Original scheduled date of full deployment Fourth quarter fiscal year 2015

• Current scheduled date of full deployment Fourth quarter fiscal year 2017

Program costs

a

• Original life-cycle cost estimate $3.9 billion

• Current life-cycle cost estimate

b

$4.2 billion

• Amount expended

a

$891 million

Program deployment details

c

• Current number of system users 689

• Expected number of system users at full 

deployment

168,000

• Current number of locations using system 2

• Expected number of locations at full deployment 379

• Legacy systems to be replaced 5

• Annual cost of legacy systems $92 million

• Number of system interfaces 167

Source: DOD’s GCSS-Army Program Management Office and historical data as reported 

in GAO-11-53. 

Note: These data have not been validated.

a

According to program officials, the estimated date of full deployment was extended to 

accommodate a change in scope to include both tactical and installation units to support 

the Army’s statutory requirement for auditability. The change in scope resulted in a 2-year 

slip in the estimated full deployment date and an approximate $200 million increase in the 

life-cycle cost estimate. 

b

As previously reported by DOD and described in GAO-11-53.

c

Data as of September 30, 2011. 

Program Owner

Deputy Chief of Staff for 

Logistics, Army

Functionality

GCSS-Army is intended to 

provide the capability to track 

supplies, spare parts, and 

organizational equipment. It is to 

be used to track unit 

maintenance, total cost of 

ownership, and other financial 

transactions related to logistics 

for all Army units. The system is 

intended to provide asset visibility 

for accountable items.

Annual Dollar Value Intended 

to Control and Account

On an annual basis, GCSS-Army 

is intended to be used to manage 

$216 billion in assets. 

Global Combat Support System-Army

(GCSS-Army) 

Page 7 GAO-12-565R DOD Financial Management
Enclosure III

DOD’s Reported Status as of December 31, 2011

Program timeline

• Initiation date December 1999

• Original scheduled date of full deployment Fiscal year 2005

• Current scheduled date of full deployment

a

December 2011

Program costs

b

• Original life-cycle cost estimate $2.6 billion

• Current life-cycle cost estimate

a

$4.2 billion

• Amount expended

c

$1.6 billion

Program deployment details

• Current number of system users 20,235

• Expected number of system users at full

deployment

20,235d

• Current number of locations using system 50

• Expected number of locations at full deployment 50

• Legacy systems to be replaced 2

• Annual cost of legacy systems $25 million

• Number of system interfaces 70

Source: DOD’s LMP Program Management Office and historical data as reported in 

GAO-11-53. 

Note: These data have not been validated.

a

As previously reported by DOD and described in GAO-11-53.

b

Program officials stated that as of October 2010, LMP Increment 1 was fully deployed 

and in December 2011, the program was approved to transition to sustainment. Program 

officials also stated that in December 2011, the program was approved to proceed with 

the prototyping phase for Increment 2 which is intended to deliver expanded logistics 

capability. Program officials further stated that the program’s Increment 1 deployment 

schedule had been delayed because the size, scope, and complexity of the effort were 

initially underestimated. In 2005, the Army directed a strategic pause and, in 2006, 

restructured the contract to reflect the current schedule.

c

According to program officials, the current life-cycle cost estimate covers a 27-year 

period, whereas the original life-cycle cost estimate covered a 10-year period. Program 

officials added that the current life-cycle cost estimate is for Increments 1 and 2. There 

were also increased costs associated with the LMP contract renewal that transitioned 

intellectual property rights, system sustainment, and infrastructure support from the 

contractor to the government. 

d

 

According to program officials, the expected number of system users at full deployment 

is for Increment 1 only. 

Program Owner

Program Executive Office, 

Enterprise Information Systems, 

Army

Functionality

LMP is intended to provide a 

solution that streamlines the 

maintenance, repair, and overhaul; 

planning; finance; acquisition; and 

supply of weapon systems, spare 

parts, services, and material for the 

Army’s working capital fund. LMP 

is to enable worldwide, real-time, 

total asset visibility of inventory, 

including contractor-managed 

inventories. It is intended to provide 

an anticipatory logistics planning 

tool that should result in reduced 

stock levels.

Annual Dollar Value Intended 

to Control and Account

On an annual basis, LMP is 

intended to manage $22 billion in 

inventory. 

Logistics Modernization Program

(LMP) 

Page 8 GAO-12-565R DOD Financial Management
Enclosure III

DOD’s Reported Status as of December 31, 2011

Program timeline

• Initiation date September 2009

• Original scheduled date of full deployment

a

Fourth quarter fiscal year 2014

• Current scheduled date of full deployment Fiscal year 2017

Program costs

b

• Original life-cycle cost estimate $344 million

• Current life-cycle cost estimate

c

$344 million

• Amount expended

c

$66 million

Program deployment details

• Current number of system users 0

• Expected number of system users at full 

deployment

Over 1 million

• Current number of locations using system 0

• Expected number of locations at full deployment Worldwide availability 

• Legacy systems to be replaced 56

• Annual cost of legacy systems $39 million

• Number of system interfaces 14

Source: DOD’s IPPS-A Project Management Office and historical data as reported in 

GAO-11-53. 

d

Note: These data have not been validated.

a

As previously reported by DOD and described in GAO-11-53.

b

According to program officials, the current scheduled date of full deployment slipped due 

to a change in the Army’s implementation strategy from a “Big Bang” implementation 

approach to an incremental development and implementation approach. IPPS-A is 

currently being developed and implemented in two increments with multiple releases.

c

According to program officials, the original and current life-cycle cost estimates are for 

the first of two increments. The cost for the second increment has not yet been 

determined.

d

1

Originally, the IPPS-A was a part of the Defense Integrated Military Human Resources System 

(DIMHRS) and was intended to provide a joint, integrated, standardized personnel and pay system 

for all military personnel departmentwide. Each military service is now responsible for developing its

own integrated personnel and pay system.

According to program officials, this number is for Increment I and system analysis is 

ongoing. 

Program Owner

Technology and Business 

Architecture Integration 

Directorate, Army

Functionality

IPPS-A is intended to provide a 

24-hour, web-based, integrated 

human resources system to 

soldiers, human resource 

professionals, combatant 

commanders, personnel and pay 

managers, and other authorized 

Army users. IPPS-A is designed 

to serve all components of the 

Army—Active, Reserve, and 

National Guard.

Annual Dollar Value Intended 

to Control and Account

On an annual basis, IPPS-A is

intended to control and account 

for approximately $60 billion in 

base pay and $8 billion in 

overseas contingency operations 

pay. 

Integrated Personnel and Pay System-Army

(IPPS-A)1 

Page 9 GAO-12-565R DOD Financial Management
Enclosure III

DOD’s Reported Status as of December 31, 2011

Program timeline

• Initiation date July 2003

• Original scheduled date of full deployment

a

Fiscal year 2011

• Current scheduled date of full deployment

b

August 2013

Program costs

c

• Original life-cycle cost estimate $1.9 billion

• Current life-cycle cost estimate

b,d

$2.7 billion

• Amount expended

e

$1.3 billion

Program deployment details

• Current number of system users Approximately 66,000

• Expected number of system users at full 

deployment

Approximately 71,000

• Current number of locations using system 79

• Expected number of locations at full deployment 111

• Legacy systems to be replaced 96

• Annual cost of legacy systems $103 million

• Number of system interfaces 48

Source: DOD’s Navy ERP Program Management Office and historical data as reported in 

GAO-11-53. 

Note: These data have not been validated.

a

According to program officials, the Navy ERP initiation date is August 2004. Program 

officials further stated that the July 2003 initiation date reported in GAO-11-53 represents

the date that the Navy ERP program received its acquisition category designation. 

b

As previously reported by DOD and described in GAO-11-53.

c

According to program officials, the Navy ERP’s current scheduled date of full deployment 

slipped two years as a result of 2005 Base Realignment and Closure recommendations 

that realigned and merged depot and intermediate maintenance activities, causing a 

reorganization of the Navy’s maintenance community in 2006. 

d

According to program officials, this life-cycle cost estimate was later revised in August 

2004 to $2.0 billion. 

e

According to program officials, Navy ERP’s current life-cycle cost estimate increased 

due to (1) the 2 year schedule slippage; (2) an increase in demand for on-site support 

and stabilization activities; and (3) the addition of new compliance requirements, such as 

evolving business enterprise architecture requirements.

Program Owner

Assistant Secretary for Research, 

Development, and Acquisition, Navy

Functionality

The Navy ERP is intended to 

standardize the acquisition, financial, 

program management, maintenance, 

procurement, plant and wholesale 

supply, and workforce management 

capabilities of the Navy. Specific 

capabilities to be provided by the 

Navy ERP include: 

• financial accounting and fund 

management;

• asset management to provide for 

the acquisition, custody, tracking, 

depreciation, and disposition of 

Navy assets; 

• acquisition and program 

management for project

planning, structure, execution, 

monitoring, and control; 

• workforce management to 

provide a single system for the 

civilian, military, and contractor 

workforces; 

• procurement automation of 

commitments and obligations; 

and

• wholesale and retail supply 

solution with total asset visibility 

for improved forecasting and 

utilization of materials. 

Annual Dollar Value Intended 

to Control and Account

On an annual basis, the Navy ERP is 

intended to control and account for 

$82.5 billion of total appropriations; 

$33.8 billion of total inventory; and 

$1.1 billion of plant, property, and 

equipment. 

Navy Enterprise Resource Planning System 

(Navy ERP) 

Page 10 GAO-12-565R DOD Financial Management
Enclosure III

DOD’s Reported Status as of December 31, 2011

Program timeline

• Initiation date September 2003

• Original scheduled date of full deployment November 2009

• Current scheduled date of full deployment

a

Not yet determined

Program costs

b

• Original life-cycle cost estimate $126 million

• Current life-cycle cost estimate

a,c

$1.1 billion

• Amount expended

d

$466 million

Program deployment details

• Current number of system users Approximately 18,000

• Expected number of system users at full

deployment

33,000

• Current number of locations using system 5

• Expected number of locations at full deployment 6 

• Legacy systems to be replaced 4

• Annual cost of legacy systems $4.5 million

• Number of system interfaces 37

Source: DOD’s GCSS-MC Program Management Office and historical data as reported in 

GAO-11-53. 

Note: These data have not been validated.

a

As previously reported by DOD and described in GAO-11-53.

b

The program manager stated that the current scheduled date of full deployment will not 

be determined until the planned full deployment decision—the final decision made by 

DOD officials to authorize an increment of the program to deploy software for operational 

use—in December 2012. 

c

According to program officials, the original life-cycle cost estimate was revised in 2010 

and updated to $1.0 billion.

d

The program manager stated that the current life-cycle cost estimate for GCSS-MC 

consists of Increment 1 only. The increase in the life-cycle cost estimate is primarily

attributed to the difficulty of developing a technical solution for GCSS-MC use in a 

deployed environment and changes in DOD logistics policies that resulted in fielding 

additional requirements. 

 

Program Owner

Assistant Secretary for Research, 

Development, and Acquisition, 

Navy

Functionality

GCSS-MC is intended to provide 

the deployed warfighter with 

enhanced capabilities in the 

areas of warehousing, 

distribution, logistical planning, 

depot maintenance, and 

improved asset visibility. 

Annual Dollar Value Intended 

to Control and Account

Program officials stated that 

GCSS-MC is not the Marine 

Corps’ official financial system 

and as such does not control 

financial transactions.

Global Combat Support System-Marine Corps

(GCSS-MC) 

Page 11 GAO-12-565R DOD Financial Management
Enclosure III

DOD’s Reported Status as of December 31, 2011

Program timeline

• Initiation date September 2009

• Original scheduled date of full deployment

a

Fiscal year 2017

• Current scheduled date of full deployment

a

Not yet determined

Program costs

b

• Original life-cycle cost estimate $1.3 billion

• Current life-cycle cost estimate

a

Not yet determined

• Amount expended

b

Not yet determined

Program deployment details

b

• Current number of system users Not yet determined

• Expected number of system users at full 

deployment

b

Not yet determinedb

• Current number of locations using system Not yet determined

• Expected number of locations at full deployment

b

Not yet determinedb

• Legacy systems to be replaced Not yet determined

• Annual cost of legacy systems

b

Not yet determinedb

• Number of system interfaces Not yet determined

Source: DOD’s IPPS-Navy Program Management Office and historical data as reported 

in GAO-11-53. 

b

Note: These data have not been validated.

a

As previously reported by DOD and described in GAO-11-53.

b

According to Navy Deputy Chief Management Office (DCMO) officials, this program is 

still working on refining its initial system solution and creating a strategy for acquiring the 

solution. According to Navy DCMO officials, IPPS-Navy is currently conducting business 

process reengineering efforts and has not yet been authorized to proceed with the 

planning and development of the system technology.

1

 Originally, IPPS-Navy was a part of the Defense Integrated Military Human Resources System 

(DIMHRS) and was intended to provide a joint, integrated, standardized personnel and pay system 

for all military personnel departmentwide. Each military service is now responsible for developing its 

own integrated personnel and pay system.

Program Owner

Chief of Naval Operations, Navy

Functionality

IPPS-Navy is intended to provide 

an integrated personnel and pay 

system for the Navy. 

Annual Dollar Value Intended 

to Control and Account

Program officials did not provide 

the annual dollar value the system 

is intended to control and for which 

it is intended to account.

Integrated Personnel and Pay System-Navy

(IPPS-Navy)

1

 

Page 12 GAO-12-565R DOD Financial Management
Enclosure III

DOD’s Reported Status as of December 31, 2011

Program timeline

• Initiation date August 2003

• Original scheduled date of full deployment Fiscal year 2014

• Current scheduled date of full deployment

a

Fourth quarter fiscal year 2016

Program Costs

b

• Original life-cycle cost estimate $1.1 billion

• Current life-cycle cost estimate

a

$1.6 billion

• Amount expended

c

$334 million

Program deployment details

• Current number of system users 1,053

• Expected number of system users at full 

deployment

30,000

• Current number of locations using system 2

• Expected number of locations at full deployment 170

• Legacy systems to be replaced 8

• Annual cost of legacy systems $56 million

• Number of system interfaces 84

Source: DOD’s DEAMS Program Management Office and historical data as reported in 

GAO-11-53. 

Note: These data have not been validated. 

a

As previously reported by DOD and described in GAO-11-53.

b

According to program officials, data is for increment 1 only. They further stated that 

schedule delays have resulted from the complexity of reengineering business processes; 

and designing, developing, and testing reports, interfaces, conversions, extensions, and 

workflow (RICEW) objects. 

c

According to program officials, data is for increment 1 only. They further stated that the 

increase in the life-cycle cost estimate was primarily due to schedule changes. The 

estimate also increased due to evolving technical requirements. Other factors that 

affected the cost estimate were changes in (1) the methodology used for estimating 

software development of RICEW objects; (2) the approach for design, development, and 

operations and support; and (3) the pricing methodology and rates used to determine 

Defense Information Systems Agency related costs.

Program Owner

Assistant Secretary for Financial 

Management and Comptroller, Air 

Force

Functionality

DEAMS is intended to provide the 

entire spectrum of financial 

management capabilities, 

including collections, 

commitments and obligations, 

cost accounting, general ledger, 

funds control, receipts and 

acceptance, accounts payable 

and disbursement, billing, and 

financial reporting for the general 

fund.

Annual Dollar Value Intended 

to Control and Account

On an annual basis, DEAMS is 

intended to control and account 

for $148 billion in spending. 

Defense Enterprise Accounting and 

Management System

(DEAMS) 

Page 13 GAO-12-565R DOD Financial Management
Enclosure III

DOD’s Reported Status as of December 31, 2011

Program timeline

• Initiation date January 2004

• Original scheduled date of full deployment Fiscal year 2012

• Current scheduled date of full deployment

a

September 2017

Program costs

b

• Original life-cycle cost estimate $3 billion

• Current life-cycle cost estimate $5.2 billion

• Amount expended

b

$899 million

Program deployment details

• Current number of system users 225

• Expected number of system users at full 

deployment

250,000

• Current number of locations using system 6

• Expected number of locations at full deployment 186

• Legacy systems to be replaced 240

• Annual cost of legacy systems $325 million

• Number of system interfaces 564

Source: DOD’s ECSS Program Management Office and historical data as reported in 

GAO-11-53. 

Note: These data have not been validated.

a

As previously reported by DOD and described in GAO-11-53.

b

According to program officials, schedule delays have resulted from program 

restructuring, changes in leadership, and other factors. Further, officials indicated that the 

increase in the life-cycle cost estimate is based on gaining a more detailed understanding 

of the program in areas such as data cleansing, reports, interfaces, conversions, 

extensions, and fielding. 

1

The working capital fund can be defined as an intragovernmental revolving fund that 

operates as a self-supporting entity that conducts a regular cycle of business-like 

activities. These funds function entirely from the fees charged for the services they 

provide consistent with their statutory authority.

2

The general fund can be defined as the fund into which receipts are deposited, except 

those from specific sources required by law to be deposited into other designated funds 

and from which appropriations are made by Congress to carry on the general and 

ordinary operations of the government.

Program Owner

Deputy Chief of Staff for 

Logistics, Installation, and 

Mission Support Headquarters, 

Air Force

Functionality

ECSS is intended to provide 

capabilities in the areas of 

product support and engineering; 

supply chain management; 

expeditionary logistics command 

and control; acquisition and

procurement; and maintenance, 

repair, and overhaul. 

 

Annual Dollar Value Intended 

to Control and Account

On an annual basis, ECSS is 

intended to control and account 

for (1) $13 billion of working 

capital fund budgetary authority,

1

and (2) approximately $33 billion 

of general fund budgetary 

authority2 for logistics. 

Expeditionary Combat Support System (ECSS)

Page 14 GAO-12-565R DOD Financial Management
Enclosure III

DOD’s Reported Status as of December 31, 2011

Program timeline

• Initiation date September 2009

• Original scheduled date of full deployment April 2018

• Current scheduled date of full deployment

a

Fourth quarter fiscal year 2016

Program costs

• Original life-cycle cost estimate $1.7 billion

• Current life-cycle cost estimate $1.7 billion

• Amount expended $46 million

Program deployment details

• Current number of system users 0

• Expected number of system users at full 

deployment

Approximately 550,000

• Current number of locations using system 0

• Expected number of locations at full deployment 150

• Legacy systems to be replaced 31

• Annual cost of legacy systems $120 million

• Number of system interfaces 148

Source: DOD’s AF-IPPS Program Management Office and historical data as reported in 

GAO-11-53. 

Note: These data have not been validated.

a

As previously reported by DOD and described in GAO-11-53.

1

Originally, the AF-IPPS was a part of the Defense Integrated Military Human Resources System 

(DIMHRS) and was intended to provide a joint, integrated, standardized personnel and pay system 

for all military personnel departmentwide. Each military service is now responsible for developing its 

own integrated personnel and pay system.

Program Owner

Program Executive Office and 

Service Acquisition Executive, Air 

Force

Functionality

The AF-IPPS is intended to 

provide a comprehensive, webbased solution to integrate many 

existing personnel and pay 

processes into one self-service 

system. It is intended to support 

the Active, Reserve, and Air 

National Guard components. 

Annual Dollar Value Intended 

to Control and Account

On an annual basis, AF-IPPS is 

intended to execute, track, and 

report on the disbursement of 

funds related to compensating 

Active, Reserve, and Air National 

Guard service members in the 

following amounts:

• Active - $29.5 billion

• Reserve - $1.7 billion

• Air National Guard - $3.1 

billion

Air Force - Integrated Personnel and Pay 

System (AF-IPPS)1

Page 15 GAO-12-565R DOD Financial Management
Enclosure III

DOD’s Reported Status as of December 31, 2011

Program timeline

• Initiation date January 2007

• Original scheduled date of full deployment Fiscal year 2012

• Current scheduled date of full deployment

a

September 2016

Program costs

b

• Original life-cycle cost estimate $209 million

• Current life-cycle cost estimate

a

Not yet determined

• Amount expended

b

$193 million

Program deployment details

• Current number of system users Approximately 8,000

• Expected number of system users at full 

deployment

93,980

• Current number of locations using system 10

• Expected number of locations at full deployment 29

• Legacy systems to be replaced 15

• Annual cost of legacy systems $35 million

• Number of system interfaces 36

Source: DOD’s DAI Program Management Office and historical data as reported in 

GAO-11-53. 

Note: These data have not been validated.

a

As previously reported by DOD and described in GAO-11-53.

b

DAI program officials did not provide a reason for the slippage in full deployment dates. 

Further, according to program officials, as of December 2011, the life-cycle cost estimate 

for DAI had not been finalized. 

Program Owner

Defense Logistics Agency

Functionality

The DAI system is intended to 

modernize the defense agencies’ 

financial management processes 

by streamlining financial 

management capabilities and 

transforming the budget, finance, 

and accounting operations. When 

DAI is fully implemented, it is 

expected to have the capability to 

control and account for all 

appropriated working capital and 

revolving funds at the defense 

agencies implementing the 

system. 

Annual Dollar Value Intended 

to Control and Account

Program officials did not provide 

the dollar value that DAI is 

intended to control and account 

for on an annual basis. 

Defense Agencies Initiative

(DAI) 

Page 16 GAO-12-565R DOD Financial Management
Page 17 GAO-12-565R DOD Financial Management

Enclosure IV

GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments

GAO Contact

Asif A. Khan, (202) 512-9869 or khana@gao.gov

Staff Acknowledgments

In addition to the contact named above, Cynthia Jackson, Assistant Director; 

Michael LaForge, Assistant Director; Beatrice Alff; Bruce David; LaTasha Freeman; 

Patrick Frey; and James Kernen made key contributions to this report.

(197114)
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.
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 (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 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: 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.