United States Government Accountability Office
GAO Testimony
Before the Subcommittee on Federal Management, Government
Information, Federal Services and International Security, Committee
on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, United States Senate;
and the Subcommittee on Government Organization, Efficiency and
Financial Management, Committee on Oversight and Government
Reform, House of Representatives
DOD FINANCIAL
For Release on Delivery
Expected at 10:00 a.m. EDT
Thursday, March 22, 2012
MANAGEMENT
The Army Faces Significant
Challenges in Achieving
Audit Readiness for Its
Military Pay
Statement of Asif A. Khan, Director
Financial Management and Assurance
GAO-12-501T
Chairmen Carper and Platts, Ranking Members Brown and Towns, and
Members of the Subcommittees:
It is a pleasure to be here today to discuss our work on the significant
challenges the Army faces in achieving audit readiness for its military pay.
The Army’s military pay is material to the Army’s financial statements.
The Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990, as amended, established
requirements for 24 agencies, including the Department of Defense
(DOD), to prepare annual financial statements and have them audited. 1
Further, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year
2010 mandated that DOD be prepared to validate (certify) that its
consolidated financial statements are ready for audit by September 30,
2017. 2 On October 13, 2011, the Secretary of Defense directed the
department to achieve audit readiness for the Statement of Budgetary
Resources, one of the principal financial statements, by the end of fiscal
year 2014 as an interim milestone for DOD to meet the legal requirement
in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2010 to achieve full audit readiness for all
DOD financial statements by 2017. 3
The Army’s active duty military payroll, comprising about 20 percent of its
reported $233.8 billion in fiscal year 2010 net outlays, 4 is significant to
both Army and DOD efforts to meet DOD’s 2014 Statement of Budgetary
Resources auditability goal as well as the mandate to achieve full audit
readiness for all DOD financial statements by 2017. For years, we and
others have reported continuing deficiencies with the Army’s military
1
Pub. L. No. 101-576, § 303, 104 Stat. 2838, 2849 (Nov. 15, 1990), codified, as
amended at 31 U.S.C. § 3515.
2
Pub. L. No. 111-84, § 1003, 123 Stat. 2190, 2439-40 (Oct. 28, 2009).
3
DOD, Secretary of Defense Memorandum, “Improving Financial Information and
Achieving Audit Readiness,” October 13, 2011.
4
Outlays during a fiscal year may be for payment of obligations incurred in prior
years or in the same year. Net outlays are disbursements net of offsetting
collections.
Page 1 GAO-12-501T
payroll processes and controls. 5 These reported continuing deficiencies in
Army payroll processes and controls have called into question the extent
to which the Army’s military payroll transactions are valid and accurate,
and whether the Army’s military payroll is auditable. Further, other military
components, such as the Air Force and the Navy, share some of the
same process and system risks as the Army.
My remarks today are based on our report, DOD Financial Management:
The Army Faces Significant Challenges in Achieving Audit Readiness for
Its Military Pay, which is being released today. 6 I will focus on problems
that impede the Army’s ability to (1) identify a valid population of military
payroll transactions and (2) provide documentation that supports the
validity and accuracy of payments for Army military payroll.
Our work on which this testimony is based was conducted 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 the evidence obtained provides
a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit
objectives. Our published report contains additional details on our scope
and methodology for this audit.
For fiscal year 2010, Congress appropriated more than $52 billion to the
Background Military Personnel, Army appropriation primarily for Army active duty
5
DOD Inspector General, Active Duty Military Personnel Accounts Were
Generally Valid and Secure, but DoD May have Made Improper Payments, D-
2011-093 (Arlington, VA: July 27, 2011); GAO, Military Pay: The Defense
Finance and Accounting Service–Indianapolis Could Improve Control Activities
over Its Processing of Active Duty Army Military Personnel Federal Payroll
Taxes, GAO-09-557R (Washington, D.C.: June 18, 2009); Military Pay: Hundreds
of Battle-Injured GWOT Soldiers Have Struggled to Resolve Military Debts,
GAO-06-494 (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 27, 2006); Military Pay: Army National
Guard Personnel Mobilized to Active Duty Experienced Significant Pay
Problems, GAO-04-89 (Washington, D.C.: Nov. 13, 2003).
6
GAO, DOD Financial Management: The Army Faces Significant Challenges in
Achieving Audit Readiness for Its Military Pay, GAO-12-406 (Washington, D.C.:
Mar. 22, 2012).
Page 2 GAO-12-501T
military personnel costs. 7 The Military Personnel, Army appropriation is a
1-year appropriation available for the pay, benefits, incentives,
allowances, housing, subsistence, travel, and training primarily for Army
service members on active duty. According to the Defense Finance and
Accounting Service in Indianapolis, Indiana (DFAS-IN), of the $52 billion
in fiscal year 2010 military personnel appropriations, the Army’s nearly
680,000 service members received $46.1 billion in pay and allowances.
Army Human Resources Command, unit commanders, and training
certification officials, among others, are responsible for providing DFAS-
IN with accurate and timely information regarding changes in individual
military member status necessary to maintain accurate and timely payroll
accounts. DFAS-IN is responsible for the accounting, disbursement, and
reporting for the Army’s military personnel costs using the Defense Joint
Military Pay System-Active Component (DJMS-AC).
We found that the Army could not readily identify a complete population of
Process and System Army payroll accounts for fiscal year 2010, given existing procedures and
Weaknesses Hindered systems. The Army and DFAS-IN did not have an effective, repeatable
process for identifying the population of active duty payroll accounts. In
Army’s Ability to addition, the Defense Manpower Data Center (DMDC), DOD’s central
Identify a Valid source for personnel information, did not have an effective process for
Population of Military comparing military pay account files to military personnel files to identify a
valid population of military payroll transactions. 8 For example, it took 3
Payroll Transactions months and repeated attempts before DFAS-IN could provide a
population of service members who received active duty Army military
pay in fiscal year 2010. Similarly, it took DMDC over 2 months to compare
the total number of fiscal year 2010 active duty payroll accounts to its
database of personnel files. Standards for Internal Control in the Federal
Government requires all transactions and other significant events to be
clearly documented and the documentation readily available for
examination. 9 DOD’s Financial Improvement and Audit Readiness (FIAR)
7
Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2010, Pub. L. No. 111-118, 123 Stat.
3409, 3410, 3458 (Dec. 19, 2009); Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2010, Pub.
L. No. 111-212,124 Stat. 2302, 2305 (July 29, 2010).
8
DFAS-IN processes military payroll for the Army, and DMDC supports audits by
performing analyses of Army military personnel files and data.
9
GAO, Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government,
GAO/AIMD-00-21.3.1 (Washington, D.C.: November 1999).
Page 3 GAO-12-501T
Guidance sets out key tasks essential to achieving audit readiness,
including defining and identifying the population of transactions for audit
purposes. 10 The GAO/PCIE Financial Audit Manual provides guidance
concerning typical control activities, such as independent checks on the
validity, accuracy, and completeness of computer-processed data. 11
Without effective processes for identifying a complete population of Army
military pay records and comparing military pay accounts to personnel
records, the Army will have difficulty meeting DOD’s 2014 Statement of
Budgetary Resources audit readiness goal and its 2017 goal for a
complete set of auditable financial statements.
DFAS-IN Did Not Have an DFAS-IN made three attempts from November 2010 through early
Effective Process for January 2011 to provide us a Defense Joint Military Pay System-Active
Identifying the Population Component (DJMS-AC) file extract of Army service members who
received active duty pay in fiscal year 2010. The first attempt included
of Army Military Payroll 11,940 duplicate pay accounts, and the total number of pay accounts
Records included in the second attempt increased by 28,035 records over the first
attempt, necessitating a third attempt to establish the population of fiscal
year 2010 active duty pay records. We requested that DMDC compare
the results of DFAS-IN’s third attempt to identify the population of Army
fiscal year 2010 payroll accounts against DMDC’s compilation of monthly
active duty payroll data that it received from DFAS-IN. Of the 677,024
Army active duty pay accounts, per DJMS-AC, we were able to reconcile
all but 1,025 pay accounts (less than 1 percent of the total active duty pay
accounts to pay account data that DFAS-IN had previously provided to
DMDC. However, as discussed later, we were unable to verify the validity
of the records. Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government
requires all transactions and other significant events to be clearly
documented and the documentation readily available for examination. 12 In
10
DOD, Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller/CFO), Financial
Improvement and Audit Readiness (FIAR) Guidance, December 2011.
11
GAO/PCIE, Financial Audit Manual, Volume 1, GAO-08-585G (Washington,
D.C.: July 2008). The President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency (PCIE) was
replaced by the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency
(CIGIE). CIGIE was statutorily established as an independent entity within the
executive branch by the Inspector General Reform Act of 2008, Pub. L. No. 110-
409, § 7, 122, Stat. 4302, 4305-4313 (Oct. 14, 2008) (codified at 5 U.S.C. App., §
11).
12
GAO/AIMD-00-21.3.1.
Page 4 GAO-12-501T
addition, DOD’s Financial Improvement and Audit Readiness (FIAR)
Guidance states that being able to provide transaction-level detail for an
account balance is a key task essential to achieve audit readiness.
At the time we initiated our audit, Army officials told us that they had not
yet focused on this area in their audit readiness efforts because the target
date for Army military pay was not until the first quarter of fiscal year
2015. 13 The inability to readily provide a population of military pay
accounts impeded our efforts to accomplish our audit objectives and, if
not effectively addressed, will impede the Army’s ability to meet DOD’s
new Statement of Budgetary Resources audit readiness goal of
September 30, 2014.
System Weaknesses The Army’s pay and personnel systems are not integrated, which can
Hindered the Matching of lead to differences between the systems and potential errors. Therefore,
Army Pay Accounts to an audit of military pay would include comparisons of military payroll
accounts to personnel records to identify discrepancies. However, we
Personnel Files found that DMDC did not have an effective process for comparing military
pay account files with military personnel files. While DMDC was ultimately
able to confirm that all 677,024 service members who received fiscal year
2010 active duty Army military pay 14 from the DJMS-AC had an active
duty personnel file in one of the multiple personnel systems, the
reconciliation process was labor intensive and took over 2 months to
complete. For example, DMDC’s initial comparison of active duty Army
military pay accounts to personnel records identified 67,243 pay accounts
that did not have a corresponding active army personnel record on
September 30, 2010. 15 Labor-intensive research was necessary to
reconcile the differences between DJMS-AC pay records and Army
personnel files compiled by DMDC. According to DMDC, these
differences related primarily to personnel who had either left or were
scheduled to leave the service, were reserve component soldiers
13
Subsequent to this discussion, the Secretary of Defense issued a memo
accelerating the Statement of Budgetary Resources audit readiness goal from
2017 to 2014.
14
Fiscal year 2010 was the most recently completed fiscal year at the time of our
audit.
15
The personnel file used for comparison included service members who were
still on active duty in the Army on September 30, 2010, and did not cover the
entire fiscal year.
Page 5 GAO-12-501T
released from active duty, or were soldiers who had died during fiscal
year 2010.
DMDC attempted to complete our requested comparison of active duty
Army pay accounts to military personnel records in January 2011, but
was unable to complete the reconciliation until early March 2011. DMDC
officials told us that the reasons for the delays included mainframe
computer issues, 16 staff illness and turnover, and management data
quality reviews of the file comparison results, including additional file
comparisons to resolve differences. We referred six duplicate Social
Security numbers in personnel account records that we confirmed with
the Social Security Administration to DMDC and the Army for further
research and appropriate action. 17 The absence of an effective process
for confirming that the Army’s active duty payroll population reconciles to
military personnel records increases the risk that the Army will not meet
DOD’s Statement of Budgetary Resources auditability goal of September
30, 2014.
We identified deficiencies in DFAS-IN and Army processes and systems
The Army Was Unable for readily identifying and providing documentation that supports
to Provide payments for Army military payroll. First, DFAS-IN had difficulty retrieving
and providing usable Leave and Earnings Statement files for our sample
Documentation to items. Second, the Army and DFAS-IN were able to provide complete
Support the Validity documentation for 2 of our 250 military pay account sample items, partial
and Accuracy of a support for 3 sample items, but no support for the remaining 245 sample
items. Because the Army was unable to provide documents to support
Sample of Payroll reported payroll amounts for our sample of 250 soldier pay accounts, we
Transactions were unable to determine whether the Army’s payroll accounts were valid
and we could not verify the accuracy of payments and reported active
duty military payroll. Further, because military payroll is significant to the
financial statements, the Army will not be able to pass an audit of its
Statement of Budgetary Resources without resolving these control
weaknesses.
16
DMDC and other DOD agencies use the Navy Postgraduate School mainframe
computer to support their activities and share data processing priorities.
17
The six duplicate personnel records related to Social Security numbers that
were assigned to two different service member names.
Page 6 GAO-12-501T
DFAS-IN Could Not DFAS-IN staff experienced difficulty and delays in providing usable Leave
Readily Provide Usable and Earnings Statement files to support our testing of Army military
Leave and Earnings payroll. We selected a sample of 250 Army active duty soldier pay
accounts and in April 2011 requested the relevant Leave and Earnings
Statement Files for Sample Statement files for fiscal year 2010. Standards for Internal Control in the
Items Federal Government requires internal control and all transactions and
other significant events to be clearly documented and the documentation
readily available for examination. 18 DOD Regulation 7000.14-R, Financial
Management Regulation (FMR), requires the military components to
maintain documentation supporting all data generated and input into
finance and accounting systems or submitted to DFAS. 19 After multiple
discussions and requests, we ultimately obtained usable Leave and
Earnings Statement files for our sample items—5 weeks after our initial
request. DFAS-IN took over 2 weeks to provide the initial set of Leave
and Earning Statement files because it needed to retrieve files from two
areas of the Defense Joint Military Pay System-Active Component
(DJMS-AC). The DJMS-AC database holds the current month plus the
previous 12 months’ data. Data older than this are archived and need to
be retrieved from the archived database. In addition, the first set of Leave
and Earnings Statement files that DFAS-IN provided included statements
outside the requested fiscal year 2010 timeframe of our audit. It took 1
week, including our data reliability review, to obtain the second set of
DFAS-IN Leave and Earnings Statement files consisting of 445 separate
files containing monthly statements for 250 service member pay accounts
in our sample. We determined that the Leave and Earnings Statement
files for an individual service member generally were in two or more of the
files provided. Consequently, we had to combine these files into a format
with each service member’s Leave and Earnings Statement files grouped
together to include all of the pay and allowance information for the service
members in our sample. This combining and formatting required 2
additional weeks.
18
GAO/AIMD-00-21.3.1.
19
DOD, FMR, Volume 6A, Chapter 2, “Financial Reports Roles and
Responsibilities,” ¶ 020201.B. (rev. August 2011).
Page 7 GAO-12-501T
The Army Was Unable to We found that the Army’s inability to locate personnel documents to
Locate Supporting support its military payroll transactions was primarily the result of
Documentation for weaknesses in Army procedures. Standards for Internal Control in the
Federal Government requires internal control and all transactions and
Military Pay Account other significant events to be clearly documented and the documentation
Sample Items readily available for examination. 20 DOD Regulation 7000.14-R, Financial
Management Regulation (FMR), requires the military components to
maintain documentation supporting all data generated and input into
finance and accounting systems or submitted to DFAS. 21 This regulation
also requires the components to ensure that audit trails are maintained in
sufficient detail to permit tracing of transactions from their sources to their
transmission to DFAS. Audit trails are necessary to demonstrate the
accuracy, completeness, and timeliness of transactions as well as to
provide documentary support for all data generated by the component
and submitted to DFAS for recording in the accounting systems and use
in financial reports. Further, DOD’s FIAR Guidance states that identifying
and evaluating supporting documentation for individual transactions and
balances, as well as the location and sources of supporting
documentation and confirming that appropriate supporting documentation
exists, is a key audit readiness step. 22 Without the capability to readily
locate and provide supporting documentation for military pay transactions,
the Army’s ability to pass a financial statement audit will be impeded.
As of the end of September 2011, 6 months after receiving our initial
request, the Army and DFAS-IN were able to provide complete
documentation for 2 of our 250 sample items, partial support for 3 sample
items, and no support for the remaining 245 sample items. As shown in
figure 1, our review of the partial documentation provided for 3 sample
items showed that the Army was unable to provide supporting
documentation for common elements of its military pay, including basic
allowance for housing, cost of living allowance, hardship duty pay-
location, and hostile fire/imminent danger pay.
20
GAO/AIMD-00-21.3.1.
21
DOD, FMR, Volume 6A, Chapter 2, “Financial Reports Roles and
Responsibilities,” ¶ 020201.B. (rev. August 2011).
22
DOD, Fiscal Year 2010 Financial Improvement and Audit Readiness (FIAR)
Guidance, Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller/CFO)
(Arlington, VA: May 15, 2010).
Page 8 GAO-12-501T
Figure 1: Test Results for 5 of 250 Soldier Pay Account Sample Items
One of the factors impeding the Army’s ability to provide supporting
documentation is that it does not have a centralized repository for pay-
affecting documents. Army personnel and finance documentation
supporting basic pay and allowances resides in numerous systems, and
original hard copy documents are scattered across the country—at
hundreds of Army units and National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA) federal records centers. According to Army and
DFAS-IN officials, there are at least 45 separate systems that the Army
uses to perform personnel and pay functions with no single, overarching
personnel system. Although these systems contain personnel data on
Army active duty military members and their dependents and feed these
data to DJMS-AC, the systems do not contain source documents.
Further, we found that the Army had not established a mechanism for
periodic monitoring, review, and accountability of the Interactive
Page 9 GAO-12-501T
Personnel Management System (iPERMS) to ensure that personnel files
are complete. Army Regulation No. 600-8-104, Military Personnel
Information Management/Records, establishes requirements for the
Army’s Official Military Personnel File. 23 The Army deployed iPERMS in
2007 and designated it as the Army’s Official Military Personnel File.
However, when we attempted to find supporting documents in iPERMS,
we found that this system had not been consistently populated with the
required service member documents, resulting in incomplete personnel
records. For example, when testing our sampled transactions, we
discovered that documents, such as orders to support a special duty
assignment, permanent change of station orders, and release or
discharge from active duty, that should have been in iPERMS were not.
The Army has designated the Human Resources Command as the owner
of iPERMS; however, local installation personnel offices across the
country are responsible for entering most documents into individual
service member iPERMS accounts. We found that documents needed to
support pay transactions are not in iPERMS because (1) Army Regulation
600-8-104 does not require the specific personnel forms to be included
and (2) some pay-supporting documents are finance documents and are
not considered personnel documents. 24 We believe these finance
documents should also be maintained in the Army’s central repository of
pay-supporting documentation.
In addition, the Army’s efforts to achieve auditability are compounded by
payroll system limitations. DJMS-AC, used to process Army active duty
military pay, is an aging, Common Business Oriented Language
(COBOL) 25 mainframe-based system that has had minimum system
maintenance because DOD planned to transition to the Forward
Capability Pay System and then to the Defense Integrated Military Human
23
Department of the Army, Army Regulation No. 600-8-104, Military Personnel
Information Management/Records (Washington, D.C.: June 22, 2004).
24
These documents include the Department of the Army (DA) Form 5960,
Authorization to Start, Stop or Change Basic Allowance for Quarters and/or
Variable Housing Allowance; the Department of Defense (DD) Form 1561,
Statement to Substantiate Payment of Family Separation Allowance (FSA); and
the DD Form 2367, Individual Overseas Housing Allowance.
25
COBOL is one of the earliest high-level programming languages. It was
developed in 1959, and the language continues to evolve.
Page 10 GAO-12-501T
Resources System. 26 DJMS-AC lacks key payroll computation abilities to
pay active duty Army service members. To address these functionality
limitations, DFAS has developed approximately 70 workaround
procedures that are currently being used to compensate for the lack of
functionality in DJMS-AC. An audit of Army military pay would necessitate
an evaluation of these procedures and related controls.
Another factor in the Army’s inability to provide support for military payroll
is that the Army has not adequately documented its personnel processes
and controls related to military pay. During our audit, we spent
considerable time attempting to identify the range of personnel and
finance documents that would be needed to support basic military pay
and allowances reported on service members’ Leave and Earnings
Statements and the appropriate office responsible for providing the
documentation. According to Internal Control Standards, written
documentation should exist covering the agency’s internal control and all
significant transactions and events. 27 The documentation for internal
control includes identification of the agency’s activity-level functions and
related objectives and control activities and should appear in
management directives, administrative policies, accounting manuals, and
other such guidance.
Army Military Pay Audit DOD’s November 2011 FIAR Status Report includes DOD’s goal of
Readiness Efforts achieving audit readiness for its Statement of Budgetary Resources by
Currently Under Way the end of fiscal year 2014. DOD and the Army have established interim
goals for meeting the fiscal year 2014 Statement of Budgetary Resources
audit readiness goal. For example, the Army plans to assert audit
readiness for its General Fund Statement of Budgetary Resources,
including military pay, by March 31, 2013, and have its assertion tested
and fully validated by June 30, 2014. Army officials stated that military
pay audit readiness poses a significant challenge and acknowledged that
the success of the Army’s efforts will be key to meeting DOD’s 2014
Statement of Budgetary Resources audit readiness goal. To meet this
goal, the Army has several military pay audit readiness efforts planned or
26
The Defense Integrated Military Human Resources System was terminated due
to the differences in the business processes, operations, and information
required by each Service.
27
GAO/AIMD-00-21.3.1.
Page 11 GAO-12-501T
under way, such as developing a matrix of personnel documents that
support military pay and allowances and developing the Integrated
Personnel and Payroll System-Army. 28 However, many of these efforts
are in the early planning stages.
In our report, we recommend that the Army document and implement a
process for identifying and validating the population of payroll
transactions and identify, centrally retain, and periodically review key
finance and personnel (i.e., pay-affecting) documents that support military
payroll transactions. The Army agreed with our recommendations to
improve the controls and processes related to active duty military. Our
report more fully describes the Army’s comments and our evaluation of
them.
Active Army military payroll, reported at $46.1 billion for fiscal year 2010,
Concluding is material to the Army’s financial statements and, as such, will be
Observations significant to DOD’s audit readiness goals for the Statement of Budgetary
Resources. The Army has several military pay audit readiness efforts that
are planned or under way. Timely and effective implementation of these
efforts could help reduce the risk related to DOD’s ability to achieve its
2014 Statement of Budgetary Resources audit readiness goal. However,
most of these actions are in the early planning stages. Moreover, these
initiatives, while important, do not address (1) establishing effective
processes and systems for identifying a valid population of military payroll
records, (2) ensuring Leave and Earnings Statement files and supporting
personnel documents are readily available for verifying the accuracy of
payroll records, (3) ensuring key personnel and other pay-related
documents that support military payroll transactions are centrally located,
retained in service member Official Military Personnel Files, or otherwise
readily accessible, and (4) requiring the Army’s Human Resources
Command to periodically review and confirm that service member Official
Military Personnel File records in iPERMS or other master personnel
record systems are consistent and complete. These same issues, if not
effectively resolved, could also jeopardize the 2017 goal for audit
28
Currently under development, the Integrated Personnel and Pay System-Army (IPPS-A)
is intended to be the Army’s future web-based Human Resources management system.
The goal of IPPS-A is to standardize, streamline, and integrate critical soldier personnel
and pay processes and data across the Active Army, Army National Guard, and Army
Reserve.
Page 12 GAO-12-501T
readiness on the complete set of DOD financial statements. In addition,
the Army’s military pay auditability weaknesses have departmentwide
implications for other military components, such as the Air Force and the
Navy, that share some of the same military pay process and systems
risks as the Army.
Chairmen Carper and Platts, Ranking Members Brown and Towns, and
Members of the Subcommittees, this completes my prepared statement. I
would be pleased to respond to any questions that you or other members
of the subcommittees may have.
If you or your staffs have any questions about this testimony, please
GAO Contact and contact me at (202) 512-9869 or khana@gao.gov. Contact points for our
Staff Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on
the last page of this testimony. GAO staff who made key contributions to
Acknowledgments this testimony are Gayle L. Fischer, Assistant Director; Carl S. Barden;
Lauren S. Fassler; Wilfred B. Holloway; Julia C. Matta, Assistant General
Counsel; Sheila D. M. Miller, Auditor in Charge; Margaret A. Mills;
Heather L. Rasmussen; James Ungvarsky; and Matt Zaun.
(197116)
Page 13 GAO-12-501T
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.
GAO’s Mission 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
Obtaining Copies of cost is through GAO’s website (www.gao.gov). Each weekday afternoon,
GAO Reports and GAO posts on its website newly released reports, testimony, and
correspondence. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products,
Testimony go to www.gao.gov and select “E-mail Updates.”
Order by Phone 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.
Connect with GAO Subscribe to our RSS Feeds or E-mail Updates. Listen to our Podcasts.
Visit GAO on the web at www.gao.gov.
Contact:
To Report Fraud,
Waste, and Abuse in Website: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm
E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov
Federal Programs Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470
Katherine Siggerud, Managing Director, siggerudk@gao.gov, (202) 512-
Congressional 4400, U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room
Relations 7125, Washington, DC 20548
Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov, (202) 512-4800
Public Affairs U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149
Washington, DC 20548
Please Print on Recycled Paper.
DOD Financial Management: The Army Faces Significant Challenges in Achieving Audit Readiness for Its Military Pay
Published by the Government Accountability Office on 2012-03-22.
Below is a raw (and likely hideous) rendition of the original report. (PDF)