Casualty Assistance: DOD and the Coast Guard Need to Develop Policies and Outreach Goals and Metrics for Program Supporting Servicemembers' Survivors
Published: 2016-06-28T00:00:00

Fast Facts:

Highlights:
section_title: Why GAO Did This Study
paragraphs: From January 2002 through November 2015, 17,911 servicemembers died while on active duty, leaving approximately 24,000 surviving dependents. The military services' casualty assistance programs guide these survivors through the casualty assistance process following the death of a servicemember.
Senate Report 114-49 included a provision that GAO review the Gold Star Advocate Program and the training provided for casualty assistance officers. This report assesses the extent to which (1) DOD and the Coast Guard have implemented the Gold Star Advocate Program and conducted outreach to survivors; and (2) DOD has developed a training program for casualty assistance officers consistent with attributes of an effective training program.
GAO analyzed statutes, DOD and Coast Guard policies on casualty matters, and DOD's military services' casualty assistance guidance and training materials. GAO interviewed officials involved in the Gold Star Advocate Program at DOD, its military services, and the Coast Guard—which is part of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
section_title: What GAO Found
paragraphs: The Department of Defense (DOD) and the Coast Guard took steps to implement the Gold Star Advocate Program in 2014 by designating Gold Star Advocates who have received, addressed, and reported a variety of issues raised by survivors, and they conducted some outreach to survivors for the program, but they have not established policies to manage the program. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 required the designation of personnel to provide support to survivors of servicemembers who died while on active duty. Known as Gold Star Advocates, these personnel are available at any point in the casualty assistance process. If a survivor is not satisfied with the casualty assistance he or she has received, the survivor may contact a Gold Star Advocate. According to DOD officials, few issues have risen to the level of the program's attention because survivor issues are generally resolved by casualty assistance officers—who serve as liaison between the survivor and the service branch following the death of a servicemember, and assist with funeral arrangements and the application and receipt of benefits and entitlements—and long-term assistance programs, which are available to provide support throughout a survivor's lifetime.
However, while steps have been taken to implement the program, neither DOD nor the Coast Guard has established policies for the program, including roles, responsibilities, and procedures. Additionally, although DOD and the Coast Guard have conducted some outreach for the program, they have not developed goals and metrics for outreach, without which some survivors may remain unaware of the casualty assistance available to them. While the program is available to serve survivors of all servicemembers who died while on active duty, its outreach methods are primarily directed toward survivors of servicemembers who have died since the program was implemented in 2014.
DOD and its military services have developed a casualty assistance officer training program that addresses the duties required of casualty assistance officers that is consistent with some attributes of an effective training program, but DOD and its military services may not have the indicators needed to evaluate the effect of that training on casualty assistance program performance. For example, DOD administers a web-based survey to survivors regarding the quality of casualty assistance they received, but the survey has roughly a 10 percent response rate. With such a low response rate, DOD acknowledged that results should be interpreted cautiously. Without improved indicators for evaluating the effect of casualty assistance officer training, DOD may not have the information needed to improve the quality of casualty assistance provided to survivors.
section_title: What GAO Recommends
paragraphs: GAO recommends that DOD and the Coast Guard develop interim policies for the Gold Star Advocate Program and determine goals and metrics for its outreach; and that DOD develop additional indicators for better evaluating its training. DOD and DHS on behalf of the Coast Guard concurred with the recommendations.

section_title: Letter
paragraphs: Military operations have focused national attention on meeting the needs  of survivors of servicemembers who die while on active duty. From  January 2002 through November 2015, 17,911 servicemembers died  while on active duty, leaving approximately 24,000 surviving dependents.  The casualty assistance programs of the Department of Defense (DOD)  and the Coast Guard guide survivors through the casualty assistance  process following the death of a servicemember.
Casualty assistance is the provision of authorized and necessary  assistance to eligible family members of deceased, missing, ill, or injured  servicemembers. The casualty assistance process includes notification of  death, assistance with funeral and burial arrangements, and assistance  with applying for government benefits, among other things. DOD and the  Coast Guard provide both short-term and long-term casualty assistance  to survivors. After the death of a servicemember on active duty, DOD and  the Coast Guard assign a casualty assistance officer who is responsible  for providing immediate assistance to survivors. After that, survivors are  assisted by long-term assistance programs, which are available to  provide support throughout a survivor’s lifetime. Additionally, section 633  of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 required  each secretary of a military department to designate for each armed force  a member or civilian employee of such military department to assist  survivors of servicemembers who die while on active duty. Known as  Gold Star Advocates, these personnel are available at any point in the  casualty assistance process to provide survivors with support and  address issues that are raised by survivors regarding casualty assistance  and the receipt of benefits. While there are several programs available to  provide support to survivors, the Gold Star Advocate Program is available  to address any concerns that survivors may have during any stage of the  casualty assistance process. If a survivor is not satisfied with the casualty  assistance he or she has received, the survivor may contact a Gold Star  Advocate. Section 633 of the National Defense Authorization Act for  Fiscal Year 2014 also required the Secretary of Defense to implement a  training program for casualty assistance officers. Casualty assistance  officers serve as liaison between the survivor and the service branch and  assist with funeral arrangements and the application and receipt of  benefits and entitlements. The training program for these personnel was  to include training designed to ensure that casualty assistance officers  provide the spouse and other dependents of a deceased servicemember  with accurate information about the benefits to which they are entitled and  other casualty assistance available to them. Per the statutory provision,  the services may include elements of the training that are specific or  unique to a particular service, and they must provide the training not less  often than annually.
Senate Report 114-49, which accompanied a proposed Senate bill for the  National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016, included a  provision for us to review the Gold Star Advocate Program of DOD and  the Coast Guard and the training provided for casualty assistance  officers. We assessed the extent to which (1) DOD and the Coast Guard  have implemented the Gold Star Advocate Program and conducted  outreach to survivors; and (2) DOD has developed a training program for  casualty assistance officers consistent with attributes of an effective  training program.
For the first objective, we reviewed DOD and Coast Guard policy on  casualty matters and the meeting minutes of DOD’s Casualty Advisory  Board—the panel responsible for developing and recommending  casualty-related policy and guidance—and compared these documents  with internal control standards and the statutory requirements of section  633 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 for the  Gold Star Advocate Program. We also interviewed officials involved in  the Gold Star Advocate Program from the Office of the Under Secretary  of Defense for Personnel and Readiness (OUSD(P&R)), DOD’s military  services, and the Coast Guard. To determine the extent to which DOD  and the Coast Guard have conducted outreach to survivors for the Gold  Star Advocate Program, we compared DOD and Coast Guard outreach  efforts for the program with best practices for consumer education  planning. We also reviewed section 633 of the National Defense  Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014, DOD and Coast Guard casualty  assistance policy, and DOD’s Casualty Advisory Board meeting minutes  for statutory requirements, policies, or guidance related to outreach for  the program. We also interviewed officials from OUSD(P&R), DOD’s  military services, and the Coast Guard to determine how they  communicate information on the program, and we interviewed a non- generalizable range of survivor advocacy groups and casualty assistance  officers to determine their level of understanding of the Gold Star  Advocate Program.
For the second objective, we reviewed DOD casualty assistance policy,  service-level casualty assistance guidance, casualty assistance officer  training materials, and the DOD Survivor Survey, intended to collect  survivor feedback on the quality of casualty assistance provided by the  military services, among other things, and compared these documents to  the training assessment framework identified in A Guide for Assessing  Strategic Training and Development Efforts in the Federal Government.  We found the DOD Survivor Survey data to be of undetermined reliability,  as will be discussed later in this report. We also reviewed section 562 of  the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006, which  required DOD to prescribe policy addressing data collection regarding the  quality of casualty assistance provided to survivors, and section 633 of  the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014, which  required DOD to develop a training program on casualty assistance.  Finally, we interviewed officials from OUSD(P&R) and DOD’s military  services to determine how they implement their respective casualty  assistance officer training programs. Appendix I provides a more detailed  discussion of our scope and methodology.
We conducted this performance audit from June 2015 to June 2016 in  accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.  Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain  sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our  findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that  the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and  conclusions based on our audit objectives.
subsections: section_title: Background
paragraphs: Casualty assistance has evolved over the past several decades. In years  past, survivors were notified of a servicemember’s death via telegram or a  letter of condolence and were not provided assistance with applying for  benefits. Today, casualty assistance has grown to encompass numerous  benefits available to survivors as well as DOD and Coast Guard  requirements with respect to the provision of casualty assistance for  survivors. Section 562 of the National Defense Authorization Act for  Fiscal Year 2006 required the Secretary of Defense to prescribe policy  and procedures for the provision of casualty assistance that are, with  some exceptions, uniform across the military departments. Additionally,  we reported in 2006 that DOD did not have a comprehensive oversight  framework or standards to monitor casualty assistance provided to  survivors, among other things. We recommended that DOD develop an  oversight framework that includes measurable DOD-wide objectives for  casualty assistance programs and that the department incorporate  standards, such as a comprehensive checklist of duties for casualty  assistance officers, when revising its casualty matters instruction. In 2008  DOD issued its revised casualty matters instruction, which strengthened  oversight of casualty assistance and required casualty assistance  procedures to be uniform throughout DOD. A list of related GAO  products is included at the end of the report.
The present-day casualty assistance process entails numerous  requirements, many of which must be addressed quickly following a  servicemember’s death, as described in the casualty assistance guidance  of DOD, its military services, and the Coast Guard. Soon after the death  of a servicemember, the casualty assistance process begins by notifying  the next of kin of the death. This is usually performed by a uniformed  military servicemember who is accompanied by a chaplain, if available, or  another service personnel member. The notification team is trained to  professionally and compassionately deliver news that expresses the  secretary of the service’s condolences and broadly describes the  circumstances surrounding the servicemember’s death.
Following notification, a casualty assistance officer begins assisting the  person whom the deceased servicemember authorized to make funeral  arrangements. The casualty assistance officer assists designated  survivors in receiving the death gratuity payment that could help with any  immediate financial needs the survivors may have. Casualty assistance  officers also assist survivors with initiating the processes for obtaining  federal benefits and entitlements, receiving the servicemember’s personal  effects, and obtaining copies of any completed investigation reports  associated with the servicemember’s death. The casualty assistance  officer continues to assist the survivor until the survivor determines that  he or she no longer needs assistance of the level provided by the  casualty assistance officer or most benefits have been dispersed.
Once the survivor no longer needs the assistance provided by casualty  assistance officers, the survivor may choose to receive assistance from  the long-term assistance programs, which are available to provide  support throughout a survivor’s lifetime. Long-term assistance may  include providing answers to survivors’ questions or help with issues  concerning benefits. The eligibility of these benefits may be affected by  life changes that occur during a survivor’s lifetime, such as remarriage or  children turning 18 years of age. The provision of long-term case  management for casualty assistance was prescribed in section 562 of the  National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006. Since then,  each of DOD’s military services and the Coast Guard, as detailed below,  have provided long-term assistance to support survivors:
Army. The Army’s Survivor Outreach Services is its official program  designed to provide long-term support to survivors of deceased  soldiers. Survivor Outreach Services provides support for survivors  through specially trained support coordinators and financial  counselors.
Navy. The Navy Gold Star Program is its official program for providing  long-term support to survivors of sailors who die while on active  duty. The Navy Gold Star Program facilitates counseling and other  support services, such as organizing survivor events. Additionally, the  Navy Long Term Assistance Program is available to address  questions or issues related to survivor benefits.
Air Force. The Air Force Families Forever program provides dedicated  outreach and support to Air Force survivors. The program is  organized to provide family care experts at Airman and Family  Readiness Centers. It provides resources, support, and information to  help survivors.
Marine Corps. The Marine Corps Long-Term Assistance Program is a  permanent resource for survivors to ensure that they receive  sustained assistance from the Marine Corps. The program provides  outreach and assistance to Marine Corps survivors concerning any  issues associated with the receipt of benefits and entitlements.
Coast Guard. According to officials, while the Coast Guard does not  have a separate long-term assistance program, casualty assistance  personnel are available to address survivors’ issues and concerns for  as long as needed.
In addition to the support provided by the casualty assistance officers and  the long-term assistance programs, the Gold Star Advocate Program is  available at any point in the casualty assistance process to provide  survivors with support and address issues that are raised by survivors  regarding casualty assistance and the receipt of benefits. The Gold Star  Advocate Program is co-located with the Casualty and Mortuary Affairs  Office in the Military Community and Family Policy Office of OUSD(P&R).  Figure 1 provides a general overview of the casualty assistance process.
DOD also established the Casualty Advisory Board, which is responsible  for developing and recommending broad policy guidance related to  casualty matters. According to OUSD(P&R) officials, the board discusses  issues pertaining to casualty and survivor assistance. It also acts as the  focal point with other federal agencies, veterans’ service organizations,  and non-profit organizations to improve support and assistance for  survivors. The board meets tri-annually and is composed of voting  members representing each of DOD’s military services and the Coast  Guard, as well as a member designated by the Chairman of the Joint  Chiefs of Staff.
Within DOD, Military OneSource represents another source of support  available to survivors. Military OneSource is a DOD-funded program that  provides comprehensive information on aspects of military life, such as  coping with deployments and spousal employment and education, at no  cost to active duty servicemembers and their families. For survivors of  servicemembers who died while on active duty, officials told us that  Military OneSource provides grief counseling, tax assistance (such as  assistance with filing the deceased servicemember’s final tax return), and  assistance with obtaining benefits.
There are also organizations outside of DOD and the Coast Guard that  provide casualty assistance. For example, the Department of Veterans  Affairs (VA) administers two monetary benefits available to survivors: the  Servicemembers’ Group Life Insurance program, which is purchased by  the VA from an insurance company for military personnel; and  Dependency Indemnity Compensation, which provides long-term monthly  payments to eligible surviving spouses and children. The Social Security  Administration also provides support to survivors through monthly  payments. There are also several survivor advocacy groups that provide  support to survivors. For example, Tragedy Assistance Program for  Survivors, a non-profit organization, provides care to survivors through a  national peer support network and connection to grief resources. The  Gold Star Wives of America, Inc., is another survivor advocacy group that  works to improve the benefits of surviving spouses.
Finally, depending on the circumstances surrounding the  servicemember’s death, the survivor may receive one of two types of  survivor lapel buttons. Survivors of servicemembers whose deaths  occurred in certain conflicts or military operations are entitled to wear the  Gold Star Lapel Button, which is governed by statute and was established  by Congress in 1947. Survivors of servicemembers who died while on  active duty due to other circumstances receive the Next of Kin Lapel  Button.
section_title: DOD and the Coast Guard Have Taken Steps to Implement the Gold Star Advocate Program, but Have Not Established It in Policy or Determined Outreach Goals or Metrics
paragraphs: DOD and the Coast Guard have taken steps to implement the Gold Star  Advocate Program, in that they have designated Gold Star Advocates  who have received, addressed, and reported a variety of issues raised by  survivors. However, neither DOD nor the Coast Guard has developed  policies to manage the program, including Gold Star Advocate Program  roles, responsibilities, and procedures. Additionally, DOD and the Coast  Guard have conducted outreach to survivors for the program, but they  have not determined goals and metrics for outreach.
subsections: section_title: DOD and the Coast Guard Have Taken Steps to Implement the Gold Star Advocate Program to Address Issues Raised by Survivors
paragraphs: In 2014, DOD and the Coast Guard took steps to implement the Gold Star  Advocate Program to address the requirements of section 633 of the  National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014. This provision  required each service secretary to designate a servicemember or civilian  employee to assist survivors by (1) addressing complaints regarding  casualty assistance or receipt of benefits; (2) providing support regarding  casualty assistance or receipt of benefits; and (3) making reports  regarding the resolution of complaints, including recommendations  regarding the settlement of claims with respect to benefits. Following  passage of the act, in June 2014 DOD’s military services and the Coast  Guard identified the Gold Star Advocates within their respective  departments. According to DOD officials, the Gold Star Advocates are  subject matter experts in casualty matters. Additionally, according to  OUSD(P&R) officials, in June 2015 DOD designated a department-level  Gold Star Advocate who was retitled the DOD Gold Star Advocate  Program Manager in January 2016.
OUSD(P&R) officials stated that the Gold Star Advocate Program is  intended to provide support to survivors by addressing issues raised by  survivors. According to officials with OUSD(P&R), DOD’s military  services, and the Coast Guard, these issues are raised via several  methods. For example, issues are received in emails and phone calls  from survivors, and they are tracked by the Gold Star Advocates in  spreadsheets, in email folders designated for tracking issues, or in  databases. The Gold Star Advocates may themselves also raise issues to  the attention of the program. For example, if a service Gold Star Advocate  determines that an issue stems from a gap in policy related to survivors,  or that the issue may warrant a change in policy, the Gold Star Advocate  can identify the issue for further review.
Additionally, issues raised to the program are documented and tracked in  a ledger maintained by the DOD Gold Star Advocate Program Manager.  The ledger contains information on the issue, its origin, how it was raised  to the program, and its ultimate resolution, among other things. Issues are  also documented in briefing slides that are reported at tri-annual meetings  of the Casualty Advisory Board, as the Casualty Advisory Board is able to  recommend any policy changes that may be necessary. According to  meeting minutes, they report on and discuss all issues received since the  last meeting, as well as any updates to the resolution of previously  received issues. Finally, according to DOD officials, the Gold Star  Advocates from DOD’s military services and the Coast Guard hold  monthly meetings with DOD’s Gold Star Advocate Program Manager  during which they discuss issues raised to the program.
DOD officials stated that the Gold Star Advocates primarily address  survivors’ issues as they relate to casualty assistance policy. DOD  officials stated that when survivors raise issues to the Gold Star Advocate  Program it is usually not because they have received unsatisfactory  casualty assistance, but rather because they disagree with the policies  that govern the services they received. Several of the issues that the Gold  Star Advocate Program addresses involve agencies or entities outside of  DOD’s casualty assistance programs. In these cases, the program  coordinates with the agency or entity that is best equipped to resolve the  issue. According to OUSD(P&R) officials, the Gold Star Advocate  Program ensures that the agency or entity is made aware of the issue,  coordinates with the agency on a plan of action, and follows up to  determine what action was taken and whether the issue was resolved.
The Gold Star Advocate Program addresses a variety of issues raised by  survivors. According to OUSD(P&R) officials, many survivor requests of  the program are for replacements of the Gold Star Lapel or Next of Kin  Lapel buttons provided to the primary next of kin of servicemembers who  die in certain conflicts or military operations or on active duty due to other  circumstances. Since 2014, the program has addressed 12 other discrete  issues, including a travel and moving expense claim issue raised by a  survivor who did not receive a moving expense settlement because the  survivor had not submitted the requisite claim within the 2-year time  limitation. The Gold Star Advocate Program reported the issue to the  Defense Travel Management Office, which granted an exception to the  time limitation and reimbursed the survivor for the moving expenses. As  an example of an issue that is currently being addressed, the Gold Star  Advocate Program was made aware that stepchildren of servicemembers  who died while on active duty were having their DOD identification card  privileges and medical benefits revoked when their biological parent  remarried. The revocations were based on Defense Enrollment Eligibility  Reporting System personnel’s interpretation of an instruction provision.  The issue was reported to the Defense Human Resources Agency and  the Defense Health Agency. The Defense Health Agency General  Counsel found that the stepchildren should retain their benefits even if  their biological parent remarries. Additionally, the Defense Human  Resources Agency is working on a communications plan to disseminate  this information. Appendix II provides a complete list of the issues  addressed by the Gold Star Advocate Program through March 2016.
According to DOD officials, few issues have risen to the level of the Gold  Star Advocate Program because survivor issues are generally resolved  by casualty assistance officers and the long-term assistance programs.  For example, in 2015 the Marine Corps Long-Term Assistance Program  addressed 29 cases of survivor issues with benefits and compensation  and 30 cases of issues concerning personal effects, among others.  Similarly, from October 2015 through the beginning of December 2015,  the Navy Long Term Assistance Program addressed 24 survivor issues  concerning benefits, among others. According to Air Force officials, most  survivor issues are handled at family readiness centers at the installation  level, and three issues were addressed by the Air Force Families Forever  program. Army officials stated that one reason why issues are resolved  without rising to the level of the Gold Star Advocate is because the Army  has an active outreach program that allows them to address issues as  they arise.
section_title: DOD and the Coast Guard Have Not Established Policies Covering the Gold Star Advocate Program
paragraphs: DOD and the Coast Guard have taken steps to implement the Gold Star  Advocate Program, but they have not established policies to manage the  program. For example, DOD and the Coast Guard have designated Gold  Star Advocates, but they have not clearly defined their roles and  responsibilities in policy. Moreover, DOD and the Coast Guard have  procedures for addressing and reporting on issues raised by survivors,  but they have not established these procedures in policy. Federal internal  control standards state the importance of internal control activities, such  as policies and procedures, to help ensure that management’s directives  are carried out and that the organization’s missions, goals, and objectives  are met. Internal controls also help ensure compliance with laws and  regulations. A good internal control environment requires that the  organizational structure clearly defines key areas of authority and  responsibility and establishes appropriate lines of reporting. Establishing  policy for a program can aid in establishing internal control and defining  the program’s roles, responsibilities, and procedures. For example,  DOD’s casualty matters instruction defines the Casualty Advisory Board’s  roles, responsibilities, and procedures for developing and recommending  policy guidance related to casualty matters. Table 1 lists the key statutory  requirements of section 633 of the National Defense Authorization Act for  Fiscal Year 2014, the extent to which DOD and the Coast Guard have  implemented those requirements, and whether DOD and the Coast Guard  have issued policy on those requirements.
Existing policies governing casualty assistance matters have not been  updated to include policies for the Gold Star Advocate Program because  the Gold Star Advocate Program was just implemented in 2014.  According to DOD officials, the Gold Star Advocate Program is planned  for inclusion in its revision to its casualty matters instruction. In an April  2015 update provided to Congress on the implementation of section 633  of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014, DOD  stated that the revision was expected to be published in summer 2016;  however, according to OUSD(P&R) officials, the revision is not expected  to be completed until 2017, due to internal review and approval  procedures and the necessity of issuing another casualty-related policy  first. While OUSD(P&R) officials provided a timeline for when they  anticipate issuing the revised casualty matters instruction, they did not  provide documentation of a draft. According to a Coast Guard official, the  Gold Star Advocate Program is also planned for inclusion in a revision of  its casualty matters instruction; however, officials stated that the revision  process will take several years. Therefore, the Coast Guard was also not  able to provide documentation of a draft.
While the Gold Star Advocate Program has not yet been included in the  casualty matters instructions for DOD or the Coast Guard, interim policy  covering the Gold Star Advocate Program could be promulgated in other  ways. For example, according to OUSD(P&R) officials, interim policy for  the program could be established in a charter. Similarly, DOD and the  Coast Guard could issue memoranda establishing the roles,  responsibilities, and procedures for the program. However, while the  program is ultimately planned for inclusion in the revision to the casualty  matters instructions of DOD and the Coast Guard, according to DOD and  Coast Guard officials, in the interim preceding the revision, policies  covering the program have not been established. Until policies to govern  the Gold Star Advocate Program are established that outline roles,  responsibilities, and procedures, it may be difficult for DOD and the Coast  Guard to ensure that the program’s mission, objectives, and statutory  requirements under section 633 of the National Defense Authorization Act  for Fiscal Year 2014 are carried out consistently and sustained.
section_title: DOD and the Coast Guard Have Conducted Some Outreach to Survivors for the Gold Star Advocate Program but Do Not Have Outreach Goals or Metrics
paragraphs: In addition to taking steps to implement the Gold Star Advocate Program,  DOD and the Coast Guard conduct some outreach for and publicize the  program to survivors using a variety of both direct and indirect methods  and media, but they have not developed outreach goals or metrics. As an  example of direct outreach, DOD and the Coast Guard provide survivors  with DOD’s A Survivor’s Guide to Benefits, which contains information on  funeral and burial arrangements, benefits, and survivor support services,  among other things. The guide also contains a section on the Gold Star  Advocate Program and provides contact information for the Gold Star  Advocates of each of DOD’s military services and the Coast Guard, along  with the contact information for the DOD Gold Star Advocate. The guide  explains that the purpose of the Gold Star Advocate Program is to provide  support to survivors through addressing issues raised by survivors. It  informs survivors that they can contact the Gold Star Advocates if they  have any concerns with the casualty assistance provided to them.  Survivors are also made aware of the program through letters sent by  DOD’s military services and the Coast Guard to survivors at different  times following the servicemember’s death. For example, the Navy sends  letters at the 60-day and 1-year points following the death of a  servicemember, according to Navy officials. The Gold Star Advocate  Program may also be publicized to survivors through their casualty  assistance officers. However, while casualty assistance officers could  serve as a primary means of providing information about the program to  survivors, of the casualty assistance officer training materials we  reviewed only the Marine Corps’ contained specific information about the  Gold Star Advocate Program.
According to OUSD(P&R) officials, outreach for the Gold Star Advocate  Program is also conducted through some less direct methods. For  example, outreach for the program is conducted at survivor forums  sponsored by DOD and the VA. These forums are held quarterly and are  attended by DOD’s military services and the Coast Guard, federal  agencies involved in casualty matters, and survivor advocacy groups,  according to DOD officials. The Gold Star Advocate Program is also  publicized on the Military OneSource website, which provides contact  information for the Gold Star Advocates of each of DOD’s military  services and the Coast Guard, along with that of the DOD Gold Star  Advocate, and explains the purpose of the program. OUSD(P&R) officials  stated that they monitor the number of “hits” the Military OneSource  website receives for its Gold Star Advocate Program webpage. Each of  DOD’s military services and the Coast Guard also has a separate website  that provides long-term assistance information for survivors. These  websites identify the long-term assistance services available as well as  casualty assistance support contact information; however, only the  websites of the Marine Corps and Army contain information on their  respective Gold Star Advocates and the Gold Star Advocate Program.  Finally, an article announcing the Gold Star Advocate Program was  published in July 2014 on the Gold Star Wives of America, Inc., website,  informing members of that advocacy group.
While OUSD(P&R), DOD’s military services, and the Coast Guard  conduct outreach and publicize the Gold Star Advocate Program to  survivors using a variety of methods and media, they have not  determined goals or metrics for this outreach. Key practices for  conducting consumer education include, among other things, defining  goals and objectives and establishing metrics to measure success in  achieving objectives. For example, a goal can be to increase awareness  of the Gold Star Advocate Program. Once a goal is clearly defined, DOD  and the Coast Guard can establish the necessary targets to measure the  effectiveness of their outreach efforts. Establishing process and outcome  metrics could also help DOD and the Coast Guard determine whether the  current resources dedicated to outreach need to be adjusted.
According to officials from each of DOD’s military services and  OUSD(P&R), they do not have a goal or plan to reach back to survivors of  servicemembers who died prior to the program’s implementation to  increase awareness of the program among these survivors. OUSD(P&R)  officials emphasized that reaching back to these survivors is not a  statutory requirement. However, while the Gold Star Advocate Program is  available to serve survivors of all servicemembers who died while on  active duty, its direct outreach methods are primarily directed toward the  survivors of servicemembers who have died since the program was  implemented. For example, survivors of servicemembers who have died  since the program was implemented receive information about it from  casualty assistance officers, DOD’s A Survivor’s Guide to Benefits, and  the letters DOD’s military services and the Coast Guard send to survivors  at different times following the servicemember’s death. Several of DOD’s  military services noted resource constraints in making all survivors aware  of the Gold Star Advocate Program, especially with respect to contacting  survivors of servicemembers who died prior to the program’s  implementation. OUSD(P&R) officials stated that some of these survivors  may have progressed in their stages of grief such that direct outreach  may now be more painful for them than helpful. According to Navy  officials, the Navy Gold Star Program, which is separate from the Gold  Star Advocate Program, contacted those survivors of servicemembers  who died prior to the development of the Navy Gold Star Program to let  them know of the Navy program and found that while some were  appreciative of the contact, others were upset by it. According to Coast  Guard officials, the Coast Guard is also planning to reach out to survivors  of Coast Guard servicemembers who have died since September 2001,  to make them aware of the Coast Guard’s casualty assistance services  that are available to them.
Although DOD does not have plans to directly contact survivors of  servicemembers who died prior to the program’s implementation, most of  the issues the Gold Star Advocate Program has received have originated  with survivors of servicemembers who died prior to the implementation of  the program. For example, of the 12 issues raised to the program, 7  originated from survivors of servicemembers who died prior to the  program’s implementation. An additional 4 issues were raised to the  program by multiple survivors, so there is not a servicemember date of  death associated with these issues. Only one of the issues raised to the  program originated from a survivor of a servicemember who died since  the program was implemented. Additionally, as the Gold Star Advocate  Program addresses issues that are primarily not related to specific  benefits but rather to policy concerns, it is possible that more policy  concerns could originate from survivors of servicemembers who died prior  to 2014.
For the issues raised to the Gold Star Advocate Program, the ways in  which the survivor was made aware of the program were limited. For  example, of the 12 issues, 2 of those survivors were made aware of the  program through the Military OneSource website, and 1 through “read- ahead” slides prepared by DOD for a survivor’s forum. Three others were  made aware of the program through familiarity with DOD’s Casualty and  Mortuary Affairs Office, which is where the Gold Star Advocate Program  is managed. For the remaining 6 issues, either the manner in which the  survivor was made aware of the program is unknown, the issue was  raised by one of the Gold Star Advocates, or the issue was raised by  multiple survivors, so that a single manner through which the survivor was  made aware of the program is not applicable.
Although DOD does not have a goal or plans to reach back to survivors  who predate the Gold Star Advocate program due to sensitivity concerns,  there are other methods through which outreach for the program could be  improved. For example, in 2007 DOD reported on outreach actions taken  toward non-governmental organizations by providing DOD and service  casualty office points of contact and telephone numbers. Providing this  contact information was intended to aid in addressing survivor issues, as  DOD noted that often these organizations are the first to discover that  survivors have unresolved issues. Specifically, DOD noted that due to  organizational meetings, forums, and chat-rooms on the internet, these  organizations are in a unique position to discover any unresolved issues  that survivors may experience long after their relationship with their  casualty assistance officer has ended. During our review we also heard  from a survivor that information is often disseminated among survivors  through chat-rooms and social media sites.
While DOD may decide not to reach back to survivors of those  servicemembers who died prior to 2014 due to sensitivity concerns, it is  important to ensure that outreach activities are aligned with an overall  outreach goal with associated metrics in order for DOD and the Coast  Guard to establish the necessary targets to measure the effectiveness of  their outreach efforts. Moreover, establishing process and outcome  metrics could also help DOD and the Coast Guard determine whether the  current resources dedicated to outreach need to be adjusted. If  OUSD(P&R), DOD’s military services, and the Coast Guard do not  develop goals, such as to increase awareness of the Gold Star Advocate  Program, and metrics to assess their outreach for the program, some  survivors may remain unaware of the casualty assistance available to  them, and consequently the program may not be able to provide support  to all survivors who need it.
section_title: DOD Has Developed a Training Program That Is Consistent with Some Attributes of an Effective Training Program but May Not Have the Indicators Needed to Evaluate Its Effect
paragraphs: DOD has planned, designed, and implemented training to cover the  duties required of casualty assistance officers that is consistent with some  attributes of an effective training program, including providing survivors  with information on their benefits and entitlements and other forms of  casualty assistance. However, DOD’s method of collecting survivor  feedback on the quality of casualty assistance received from casualty  assistance officers—information that could aid in evaluating the effect of  casualty assistance officer training on program performance—has a low  response rate.
subsections: section_title: DOD Plans, Designs, and Delivers Casualty Assistance Training Based on Program Goals and Casualty Assistance Officer Duties
paragraphs: DOD has developed a training program for casualty assistance officers as  required by section 633 of the National Defense Authorization Act for  Fiscal Year 2014. This section required DOD to develop a standardized  comprehensive training program on casualty assistance, to ensure that  casualty assistance officers provide the spouses and other dependents of  servicemembers who have died while on active duty with accurate  information on the benefits to which they are entitled, as well as other  casualty assistance available to them. Additionally, section 562 of the  National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 required policy  that would include the qualifications, assignment, training, duties,  supervision, and accountability for the performance of casualty assistance  responsibilities. We previously developed a framework for assessing  strategic training programs in the federal government that summarizes  attributes of effective training programs. This framework consists of the  following set of components: (1) planning/front-end analysis, (2)  design/development, (3) implementation, and (4) evaluation.
In planning its casualty assistance training program—the first component  of the framework—DOD determined the duties needed for casualty  assistance officers. DOD identifies casualty assistance officer duties in its  casualty matters instruction. For example, the instruction requires all  service casualty assistance officers to assist survivors until benefits have  been applied for and received; to deliver DOD’s A Survivor’s Guide to  Benefits; to assist survivors in obtaining new identification cards; and to  provide information on available legal assistance, among other duties.  Furthermore, the casualty matters instruction identifies training  requirements for casualty assistance officers that include, among other  topics, an overview of benefits and forms preparation, grief and trauma  awareness, and public affairs information.
In addition to DOD-wide guidance on the duties of casualty assistance  officers, the services also planned their respective casualty assistance  training programs by publishing service-level guidance that identifies each  service’s casualty assistance program and the duties required for that  service’s casualty assistance officers. OUSD(P&R) officials stated that,  while the casualty matters instruction provides DOD’s military services  with the DOD standard for casualty assistance, it does not prescribe how  the services must meet that standard. Additionally, the National Defense  Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014, section 633, provides for  variations in casualty assistance officer training so as to incorporate the  traditional practices or customs of a particular service. As such, each  service assigns varying duties to its casualty assistance officers, which  incorporate service-specific practices and customs. For example, Army,  Navy, and Marine Corps casualty assistance officers are uniformed  servicemembers who provide casualty assistance as a secondary duty,  assisting survivors only when assigned to a casualty assistance case.  However, once assigned to a case, these servicemembers’ primary duty  becomes providing assistance to survivors until all benefits and  entitlements have been applied for or the survivor determines he or she  no longer requires assistance. Conversely, according to Air Force  officials, Air Force casualty assistance officers are civilian employees  whose primary job is casualty assistance, including aiding survivors in  obtaining benefits and educating Air Force personnel on casualty  assistance. Additionally, while the Navy and Marine Corps assign all of  their casualty assistance officers with responsibility for notification of a  servicemember’s death, aiding survivors with funeral arrangements, and  assisting survivors with obtaining benefits and entitlements, the Army  assigns notification duty to one group of casualty assistance officers and  assigns assistance with funeral arrangements and benefits and  entitlements to another. Army officials stated that the Army separates  these duties so that survivors do not need to again see the  servicemember who delivered the news of their servicemember’s death.  The Air Force separates these three duties further, with one group of  personnel responsible for notifications, a second group responsible for  assistance with funeral arrangements, and a third group responsible for  assistance with benefits and other entitlements. Table 2 identifies the title  each service assigns to its casualty assistance officers, whether the duty  is performed by uniformed servicemembers or civilian employees, and the  duties assigned to each service’s casualty assistance officers.
DOD and its military services address the second component of the  training assessment framework—design/development—by designing  casualty assistance training programs to cover those duties identified in  both the DOD casualty matters instruction and the service-specific  guidance. For example, the Marine Corps assigns casualty assistance  officers to notify survivors of a servicemember’s death, assist survivors  with funeral arrangements, and facilitate survivors applying for benefits  and entitlements. Therefore, the Marine Corps designed its casualty  assistance officer training to cover these duties. On the other hand, since  the Air Force divides up notification, assistance with funeral  arrangements, and assistance with benefits and entitlements among  three groups of personnel, the Air Force separates its casualty assistance  training and covers only the duties assigned to each group in the  separate training courses.
In addition to the training programs designed by the services,  OUSD(P&R) has developed a simulation training program for use by all  service casualty assistance officers. Officials stated that OUSD(P&R)  designed the program, with input from DOD’s military services and the  Coast Guard, to provide a standardized course of instruction on casualty  assistance. However, the program also incorporates the customs and  traditions unique to each service, depending on which service the  casualty assistance officer selects at the beginning of training. The  program consists of three modules—notification, funeral arrangements,  and assistance with benefits and entitlements. At the beginning of each  module, the program provides the casualty assistance officer with  background information to prepare that officer for the upcoming scenario.  Casualty assistance officers are then presented with videos of actors role- playing as survivors who “interact” with the casualty assistance officer by  demonstrating some of the potential behaviors or responses the officer  may experience with a survivor. Following the actors’ dialogue, casualty  assistance officers are presented with multiple written responses from  which to choose. Designed to portray real-life scenarios that casualty  assistance officers may encounter while conducting their duties, the  actors’ dispositions change depending on the response an officer  chooses—correct responses result in favorable reactions, while incorrect  responses may result in actors becoming uncooperative or angry. After  each response, a virtual coach provides casualty assistance officers with  immediate feedback explaining why the response the officer chose was  correct or incorrect. OUSD(P&R) officials stated that the training will be  available to the services in summer 2016.
DOD addresses the third component of the training assessment  framework—implementation—by delivering training to casualty assistance  officers to instruct them on their duties. Due to the varying roles and  duties assigned to each service’s casualty assistance officers, the  delivery of each service’s training varies in format and duration, as  described below:
Army. According to Army officials, Army casualty assistance officer  training spans 3 days of instructor-led classroom training covering  notification duties; assistance with funeral arrangements, benefits,  and entitlements; and grief, bereavement, and self-care. Although  Army casualty assistance officers undergo training to assist survivors  with notifications, funeral arrangements, and provision of benefits and  entitlements, they will only perform notification or assistance with  funeral arrangements, benefits, and entitlements when assigned to a  casualty assistance case.
Navy. Navy casualty assistance officer training consists of five  modules covering an introduction to casualty assistance, notifications,  funeral arrangements, assistance with benefits and entitlements, and  case studies. Navy officials stated that while most casualty assistance  training is provided over 2 days of instructor-led classroom training,  some Navy installations cover all five modules in 1 day.
Air Force. The Air Force splits notification, mortuary affairs, and  benefits assistance duties among three groups of personnel, with  each group attending separate training. According to Air Force  officials, the group of casualty assistance officers that provides  notifications to survivors undergoes 1-2 hours of training, while the  group that provides assistance with funeral arrangements and the  group that provides assistance with benefits and other entitlements  each attend 5 days of training.
Marine Corps. According to Marine Corps officials, Marine Corps  casualty assistance officers undergo 1 day of instructor-led classroom  training that covers eight modules, including notification, mortuary  affairs, benefits and entitlements, and grief and bereavement, among  other topics.
Table 3 summarizes the duration of training for each service’s casualty  assistance officers.
DOD’s military services have also made training available in accordance  with the annual requirement in section 633 of the National Defense  Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014. For example, Army casualty  assistance guidance states that casualty assistance officer certification  expires 1 year after completion of training. Marine Corps guidance states  that all noncommissioned and commissioned officers who could  potentially be assigned as casualty assistance officers are required to  receive annual training. According to Air Force officials, Air Force casualty  assistance officers who provide assistance with benefits and entitlements  after initial training continue to participate in monthly training sessions  which cover any changes to benefits that the casualty assistance officers  may need to be aware of. Additionally, casualty assistance officers  receive refresher training every 3 years. According to Air Force officials,  these casualty assistance officers assist survivors of both active duty and  retirees as part of their full-time position, unlike other service casualty  assistance officers, who only conduct casualty assistance duties when  assigned to a casualty assistance case. According to Navy officials, Navy  casualty assistance officers may access web-based refresher training;  however, the training is being updated.
During our review, Air Force officials provided a draft of their casualty  assistance instruction, which will include a requirement for the initial,  monthly, and triennial refresher training for their casualty assistance  officers. Air Force officials stated that this revision is planned for  implementation in summer 2016. Additionally, during our review, Navy  officials provided a draft of their casualty assistance instruction, which will  require annual training for their casualty assistance officers. According to  Navy officials, both the revised instruction and the updates to the web- based training will be implemented by the end of fiscal year 2016. Table 4  summarizes the frequency with which each service makes training  available to its casualty assistance officers.
Although the services have implemented training to cover the duties  assigned to casualty assistance officers and have made training available  in accordance with the annual requirement in section 633 of the National  Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014, DOD does not include  that statutory requirement in its casualty matters instruction. Additionally,  when we met with OUSD(P&R) officials, they were not aware of that  statutory requirement and, therefore, did not require the services to  conduct training annually. Officials stated, however, that they would  incorporate the requirement for at least annual training for casualty  assistance officers in the upcoming revision to their casualty matters  instruction. Therefore, we are not making a recommendation on this  issue.
section_title: DOD Evaluates Its Casualty Assistance Training but May Not Have the Indicators Needed to Determine Its Effect on Program Performance and the Quality of Casualty Assistance
paragraphs: DOD and its services address the fourth component of the training  assessment framework—evaluation—by conducting some evaluation of  their casualty assistance officer training. However, current evaluation  methods may not provide the indicators needed to fully evaluate the  training’s effect and the quality of the assistance provided by casualty  assistance officers. To measure the real effect of training, agencies need  to develop indicators that help determine how training contributes to the  accomplishment of agency goals and objectives. One commonly  accepted model to evaluate training consists of levels of assessment that  measure (1) participant reaction to and satisfaction with the training  program; (2) changes in employee skills, knowledge, or abilities; and (3)  the effect of the training on program results, among others. As part of a  balanced approach, assessing training should consider feedback from  employees, such as casualty assistance officers, and from customers,  such as survivors, as well as organizational results.
DOD and its services conduct some evaluations of casualty assistance  officer training programs in accordance with the first level of assessment  by measuring participant reaction to training. For example, according to  service officials, DOD’s military services evaluate participant reaction to  training by surveying casualty assistance officers upon their completion of  training. However, currently not all of DOD’s military services survey  casualty assistance officers after they have served in this function to  gauge casualty assistance officer satisfaction with how the training  prepared them to conduct their duties. According to casualty assistance  officers we met with from the Army and Marine Corps, they may complete  after-action reports to provide feedback on the services’ casualty  assistance processes. While this could serve as a method of providing  feedback on casualty assistance officer training, these after-action reports  do not specifically focus on training. Additionally, OUSD(P&R) officials  stated that DOD plans to survey casualty assistance officers on DOD’s  simulation training after they have provided assistance to survivors in  order to better gauge how the simulation training prepares casualty  assistance officers to conduct their duties. Such indicators on how  prepared casualty assistance officers felt due to the training they received  could prove useful in evaluating the effect of casualty assistance officer  training on program performance.
DOD and its services also conduct knowledge checks either during  training or upon its completion, which can assess changes in skills,  knowledge, or abilities in accordance with the second level of  assessment. For example, the Army requires its casualty assistance  officers to take an exam covering notification procedures and assisting  survivors with benefits and entitlements. Similarly, at the completion of  each module of DOD’s simulation training, casualty assistance officers  receive a score based on their professionalism, compassion, and  knowledge. Casualty assistance officers must receive a score of 80  percent or greater to earn a certificate of completion for the simulation  training.
DOD’s method of addressing the final level of assessment—the effect of  the training on program results—may not provide DOD with the  information needed to determine the effect of training on program results  or the quality of casualty assistance provided to survivors by casualty  assistance officers. In assessing the effect of training on performance,  agencies should incorporate the perspectives of different stakeholders— such as those of customers, or in this case survivors—in assessing the  effect of training. DOD currently surveys survivors on the quality of  casualty assistance provided to them by casualty assistance officers via a  web-based survey that could provide information on the effect of training  on program results. This survey is administered in accordance with  section 562 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year  2006, which required that DOD prescribe policy for data collection  regarding the quality of casualty assistance provided to survivors of  deceased servicemembers. For example, the survey queries survivors  on whether the casualty assistance they received provided them with  accurate information. Responses to the survey questions range from  “strongly agree” to “strongly disagree.” Feedback from survivors on the  quality of casualty assistance provided to them by their casualty  assistance officer could provide information on the effect of casualty  assistance officer training on program performance and the quality of  casualty assistance provided to survivors. However, the web-based  survey has historically had a low response rate. For example, the survey  conducted between October 2014 and March 2015 resulted in a survivor  response rate of 10 percent. With such a low response rate, DOD has  acknowledged that results should be interpreted cautiously. According to  Army and OUSD(P&R) officials, the Army previously utilized a telephone  survey of survivors with an approximate 80 percent response rate.  According to OUSD(P&R) officials, DOD is planning to institute a similar  telephone survey of survivors across DOD in 2016, but it is still too early  to determine whether that survey will result in a higher response rate.  Without more complete feedback from survivors, DOD may be missing  valuable indicators to help evaluate how casualty assistance officer  training contributes to improved program performance and the quality of  casualty assistance provided to survivors.
section_title: Conclusions
paragraphs: The Gold Star Advocate Program has been addressing issues raised by  survivors of deceased DOD and Coast Guard servicemembers since it  was implemented in 2014, and DOD and the Coast Guard have  conducted some outreach to survivors using several methods to inform  them of the program’s availability to provide support. However, DOD and  the Coast Guard have not yet developed policies establishing roles,  responsibilities, and procedures for the program; nor have they  determined outreach goals, along with metrics by which to measure  progress in attaining those goals. Without such policies, it may be difficult  for DOD and the Coast Guard to ensure that the program’s mission,  objectives, and statutory requirements under section 633 of the National  Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 continue to be carried out.  Moreover, without goals and metrics for outreach, DOD and the Coast  Guard may miss opportunities to reach some survivors who may be  unaware of the casualty assistance available to them from the Gold Star  Advocate Program. Regarding DOD’s casualty assistance officer training  program, without improved indicators for evaluating the effect of casualty  assistance officer training on program performance, DOD may not have  the information needed to improve the quality of casualty assistance  provided to survivors.
section_title: Recommendations for Executive Action
paragraphs: To help ensure that the Gold Star Advocate Program achieves its mission  and objectives and to enhance outreach for the program, we recommend  that the Secretary of Defense direct the Under Secretary of Defense for  Personnel and Readiness, in collaboration with the service secretaries, to  take the following two actions:
Develop interim policies to govern the program, to include  identification of roles, responsibilities, and procedures; and
Determine outreach goals and metrics by which to measure progress  in attaining those goals.
To help ensure that the Gold Star Advocate Program achieves its mission  and objectives and to enhance outreach for the program, we recommend  that the Commandant of the Coast Guard take the following two actions:
Develop interim policies to govern the program, to include  identification of roles, responsibilities, and procedures; and
Determine outreach goals and metrics by which to measure progress  in attaining those goals.
To improve the efficacy of the training provided, we recommend that the  Secretary of Defense direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel  and Readiness to develop indicators to help determine how casualty  assistance officer training contributes to the quality of the casualty  assistance program.
section_title: Agency Comments and Our Evaluation
paragraphs: We provided a draft of this report to DOD and the Department of  Homeland Security (DHS) for review and comment. Both DOD and DHS,  responding with respect to the Coast Guard, concurred with our  recommendations. Written comments from DOD and DHS are reprinted in  their entirety in appendixes III and IV, respectively. DOD also provided  technical comments, which we have incorporated in the report where  appropriate.
In its comments, DOD noted concerns with the title of our draft report.  Specifically, DOD stated that the report identifies issues with developing  metrics and measurements and codifying policy regarding the Gold Star  Advocate Program, rather than issues with casualty assistance provided  to survivors. The Gold Star Advocate Program and casualty assistance  officer training both represent subsets of DOD’s casualty assistance  program. Therefore, we changed the report title to specifically identify the  subsets which the report addresses and to reflect the recommendations  contained in the report.
DOD concurred with our recommendation to develop interim policies to  govern the Gold Star Advocate Program, to include the identification of  roles, responsibilities, and procedures. DOD stated that the policies  regarding the Gold Star Advocate Program are being incorporated into  the revision of its casualty matters instruction and that a charter is being  established for the program in the interim. DOD also concurred with our  recommendation to determine outreach goals and metrics for the  program. DOD stated that questions regarding the Gold Star Advocate  Program will be included in its planned telephonic survey of survivors,  with a goal of having the majority of survivors interviewed being aware of  the program. DOD also stated that the department will determine other  outreach goals and metrics within the next 6 months. Additionally, DOD  concurred with our recommendation to develop indicators to help  determine how casualty assistance officer training contributes to the  quality of the casualty assistance program. DOD noted that it has  developed two surveys to gauge how effective casualty assistance  officers found the simulation training developed by OUSD(P&R) to be (as  discussed in this report). We agree that this is a good first step with  respect to determining how casualty assistance officer training contributes  to the quality of the casualty assistance program, but as we stated in our  report, it would also be beneficial to incorporate the perspectives of  stakeholders—such as survivors—in assessing the effect of training on  program performance.
DHS also concurred with our recommendation to develop interim policies  to govern the Gold Star Advocate Program. DHS stated that the Coast  Guard will publish a policy memorandum announcing the formal  establishment of the program and outlining the program’s policies,  procedures, and responsibilities. Additionally, DHS concurred with our  recommendation to determine outreach goals and metrics for the  program. DHS noted several steps that it plans to take, including creating  a Gold Star Advocate Program webpage and developing measures for  outreach effectiveness.
We are sending copies of this report to the appropriate congressional  committees, the Secretary of Defense, the Under Secretary of Defense  for Personnel and Readiness, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff,  the Secretaries of the military departments, the Secretary of Homeland  Security, and the Commandant of the Coast Guard. The report is also  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) 512-3604 or farrellb@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices  of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last  page of this report. GAO staff who made key contributions to this report  are listed in appendix V.
section_title: Appendix I: Scope and Methodology
paragraphs: The scope of our engagement included the casualty assistance programs  of the Department of Defense (DOD), the Army, the Navy, the Air Force,  the Marine Corps, and the Coast Guard. We obtained data on the number  of servicemembers who died while on active duty and the number of  surviving dependents from the Defense Manpower Data Center and the  Coast Guard, from January 2002 through November 2015.
For our first objective, to determine the extent to which DOD and the  Coast Guard have implemented the Gold Star Advocate Program, we  compared DOD and Coast Guard policies on casualty matters and the  meeting minutes of DOD’s Casualty Advisory Board, the panel  responsible for developing and recommending casualty-related policy and  guidance, with the statutory requirements of the National Defense  Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014, section 633, for the Gold Star  Advocate Program. We also compared DOD and Coast Guard policies  on casualty matters with federal control standards, which state the  importance of internal control activities, such as policies and procedures,  to help ensure that management’s directives are carried out and that the  organization’s missions, goals, and objectives are met. We also  interviewed officials involved in the Gold Star Advocate Program at the  Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness  (OUSD(P&R)), the Army, the Navy, the Air Force, the Marine Corps, and  the Coast Guard to understand how the Gold Star Advocates were  designated, and the methods used to address and report on issues raised  by survivors to the Gold Star Advocate Program. To determine the extent  to which DOD and the Coast Guard have conducted outreach to survivors  for the Gold Star Advocate Program, we compared DOD’s outreach for  the program with best practices for consumer education planning. We  reviewed section 633 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal  Year 2014 for statutory requirements for the Gold Star Advocate Program  related to outreach. We also reviewed DOD and Coast Guard policy for  casualty matters, and DOD’s Casualty Advisory Board meeting minutes,  for policies or guidance related to outreach for the program. We  interviewed officials from the Gold Star Advocate Program at  OUSD(P&R), the Army, the Navy, the Air Force, the Marine Corps, and  the Coast Guard to determine how they conduct outreach for the  program, and we interviewed a non-generalizable range of survivor  advocacy groups and casualty assistance officers to determine their level  of understanding of the Gold Star Advocate Program.
For the second objective, to determine the extent to which DOD has  developed a training program for casualty assistance officers consistent  with attributes of an effective training program, we compared DOD’s  casualty matters instruction, service-level casualty assistance guidance,  and DOD and service casualty assistance officer training materials  against the training assessment framework identified in A Guide for  Assessing Strategic Training and Development Efforts in the Federal  Government. We also compared the casualty assistance officer training  frequency requirements, if any, in DOD’s casualty matters instruction and  service-level casualty assistance guidance to the National Defense  Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014, section 633, which requires  casualty assistance officer training no less often than annually. We  conducted a content analysis of DOD’s casualty matters instruction and  the service-level casualty assistance guidance and training materials to  determine the extent to which DOD has developed training that identifies  the duties needed for casualty assistance officers and links training to  these duties. To do so, two analysts independently reviewed and  assessed the casualty assistance officer duties identified in the DOD and  service-level guidance to determine whether the training materials  addressed the duties. The analysts then compared their results to identify  any disagreements and reached agreement on all items through  discussion. We also reviewed section 562 of the National Defense  Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006, which required DOD to prescribe  policy on data collection regarding the quality of casualty assistance  provided to survivors, and the National Defense Authorization Act for  Fiscal Year 2014, section 633, which required DOD to develop a training  program on casualty assistance. We reviewed the DOD Survivor Survey,  intended to collect survivor feedback on the quality of casualty assistance  provided by the military services, among other things, and analyzed the  response rate to the survey over the period of October 2014 through  March 2015. We found data from the survey to be of undetermined  reliability, since the response rate is too low to serve as a reliable source  of information for evaluating the quality of casualty assistance provided to  survivors. With such a low response rate, OUSD(P&R) officials also  acknowledged that DOD Survivor Survey responses should be  interpreted cautiously. We interviewed officials from OUSD(P&R) and  DOD’s military services to determine how they implement their respective  casualty assistance officer training programs. Finally, we interviewed  casualty assistance officers to understand their experience serving as  casualty assistance officers and the training they received to prepare  them to serve in this capacity.
Table 5 contains a complete list of the agencies and offices we contacted  during the course of our review.
We conducted this performance audit from June 2015 to June 2016 in  accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.  Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain  sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our  findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that  the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and  conclusions based on our audit objectives.
section_title: Appendix II: Issues Received and Addressed by the Gold Star Advocate Program
paragraphs: Table 6 provides a complete list of the issues received and addressed by  the Gold Star Advocate Program through March 2016. The contents of  the table are based on the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for  Personnel and Readiness (OUSD(P&R))’s documentation of issues  addressed by the program.
section_title: Appendix III: Comments from the Department of Defense
section_title: Appendix IV: Comments from the Department of Homeland Security
section_title: Appendix V: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments
subsections: section_title: GAO Contact
section_title: Staff Acknowledgments
paragraphs: In addition to the contact named above, Kimberly C. Seay (Assistant  Director), Gustavo Crosetto, Clifton G. Douglas Jr., Cynthia Grant, Amie  Lesser, Amanda Manning, Elisha Matvay, Michael McKemey, Shahrzad  Nikoo, Terry Richardson, and Cheryl Weissman made major contributions  to this report.
section_title: Related GAO Products
paragraphs: Defense Health: Actions Needed to Help Ensure Combat Casualty Care  Research Achieves Goals. GAO-13-209. Washington, D.C.: February 13,  2013.
Veterans’ Pension Benefits: Improvements Needed to Ensure Only  Qualified Veterans and Survivors Receive Benefits. GAO-12-540.  Washington, D.C.: May 15, 2012.
Military and Veterans’ Benefits: Analysis of VA Compensation Levels for  Survivors of Veterans and Servicemembers. GAO-10-62. Washington,  D.C.: November 13, 2009.
Military Personnel: DOD Needs an Oversight Framework and Standards  to Improve Management of Its Casualty Assistance Programs.  GAO-06-1010. Washington, D.C.: September 22, 2006.
Financial Management: Implications of Significant Recent and Potential  Changes for the Actuarial Soundness of the Department of Defense  Survivor Benefit Plan Program. GAO-06-837R. Washington, D.C.: July  26, 2006.
Military Personnel: DOD Needs Better Controls over Supplemental Life  Insurance Solicitation Policies Involving Servicemembers. GAO-05-696.  Washington, D.C.: June 29, 2005.
Military Personnel: Survivor Benefits for Servicemembers and Federal,  State, and City Government Employees. GAO-04-814. Washington, D.C.:  July 15, 2004.
Military Personnel: Active Duty Benefits Reflect Changing Demographics,  but Opportunities Exist to Improve. GAO-02-935. Washington, D.C.:  September 18, 2002.