|Program Title||Defense Air Transportation System|
|Department Name||Dept of Defense--Military|
|Agency/Bureau Name||Department of Defense--Military|
Direct Federal Program
|Assessment Rating||Moderately Effective|
|Assessment Section Scores||
|Program Funding Level
|*Note: funding shown for a program may be less than the actual program amount in one or more years because part of the program's funding was assessed and shown in other PART(s).|
|Year Began||Improvement Plan||Status||Comments|
Establish independent, comprehensive reviews by objective review teams. These teams need to understand system operations but must not have substantive ties with the system. USTRANSCOM is in the process of sponsoring some independent assessments that will provide a comprehensive view of the command's operations.
|Action taken, but not completed||USTRANSCOM is incorporating independent, private-sector input into the DoD distribution system. One initiative, the Defense Transportation Coordination Initiative (DTCI), is committed to improving the reliability, predictability, and efficiency of DoD materiel moving within the US. In 2005, 30 companies met with DTCI team to obtain ideas and comments regarding best business practices and commercial transportation management capabilities.|
Use modern identification systems to track shipments (including individual packages) in real time and to determine and improve accuracy of deliveries and timeliness of final deliveries.
|Action taken, but not completed||Transportation Tracking Number is an FY06-08 USTRANSCOM research and development project exploring use of identification numbers for unit cargo moves that are assuredly unique within and between Operations Plans, and compatible with Joint/Service information systems. Existing identifiers are not always unique and can be changed by users; therefore they cannot be reliably used to compare planned movement (supported commanders?? requests) with actual status (USTRANSCOM??s response).|
Refine cargo capacity measures that would provide better estimates of system capacity and use those refinements to assess long-term resource (aircraft, control systems, people, maintenance) needs.
|Action taken, but not completed||A new Joint Distribution Planning and Analysis Center (JDPAC) is under development. It will integrate the modeling and simulation of deliberate planning with day-to-day operations and adaptive planning. The JDPAC will provide better context for solving distribution questions and enable better resource allocation decisions. The JDPAC will also serve as a conduit between military distribution concepts and the best ideas from academia and commercial practices.|
|Year Began||Improvement Plan||Status||Comments|
Measure: C-5 aircraft fleet mission capable rate
Explanation:Percentage of total C-5 fleet in mission capable status
Measure: Million ton-miles per day (MTM/D) of airlift capacity by 2025
Explanation:Cargo capacity required to support DoD mobility capability
Measure: Delivery discrepancies (accuracy measure) -- Percentage of cargo pieces that have a discrepancy note against them at some point in the pipeline.
Explanation:By reducing mis-delivered articles, the workload (and, hence, the funding) put into improperly delivered materials will decline and the activity will become more efficient.
Measure: Channel Cargo On-Time Performance
Explanation:Percentage of channel cargo missions meeting velocity goals (goals and measures vary by route). No overall macro-measure currently exists. However, one route (Dover-Kuwait) is listed here as an example.
Measure: In-transit pallet visibility
Explanation:Percentage of shipments that can be tracked (status, identity, and location)
|Section 1 - Program Purpose & Design|
Is the program purpose clear?
Explanation: The United States Transportation Command's (USTRANSCOM, one of the nine major combatant commands in the Department of Defense) mission is: "To provide air, land and sea transportation for the Department of Defense (DOD) in time of peace and time of war" "AMC's primary mission is rapid, global mobility and sustainment for America's armed forces. The command also plays a crucial role in providing humanitarian support at home and around the world." [Air Mobility Command is the U.S. Air Force command that performs USTRANSCOM's air operations.]
Evidence: Sources: Air Mobility Command (AMC) Mission Statement; USTRANSCOM Mission Statement.
Does the program address a specific and existing problem, interest, or need?
Explanation: The United States needs airlift to project and sustain military forces for wartime, contingencies and peacetime. This need has been most recently highlighted in the war on terrorism, operations in Afghanistan and Iraq and tsunami relief. The airlift capability complements the Department of Defense's sealift and land transportation systems and provides transportation to the most urgently needed elements of U.S. forces.
Evidence: The National Defense Strategy and National Military Strategy lay the foundation for a global military need. That need is confirmed and estimated in the Mobility Requirements Study-05 (MRS-05) and the Mobility Capability Study (MCS), which document a required airlift capability to achieve the strategy.
Is the program designed so that it is not redundant or duplicative of any other Federal, state, local or private effort?
Explanation: No other governmental agency or private effort is tasked or has the capability to support the DOD airlift requirement. The airlift program uses a complemenatry mix of commercial and organic (DoD-owned) aircraft to meet the stated need during peacetime and wartime. The elements of what DoD calls the Total Force concept (active duty military, Air Force Reserve Associate, Air Force Reserve, Air National Guard), plus the Civil Reserve Airlift Fleet (CRAF) and contract commercial carriers provide a reasonable mix of capabilities, flexibility, and responsiveness used by Air Mobility Command (AMC) to meet its worldwide mission. The AMC Commander is designated the Single Manager for DOD airlift.
Evidence: The Presidential Airlift Policy (NSDD-280) establishes the requirement to ensure no duplication of effort. The Civil Reserve Air Fleet (commercial air carriers under contract with DoD to provide surge airlift capacity) is used in the total airlift requirement with no overlap/duplication with organic airlift. The Transportation Working Capital Fund's pay as you go system uses commercial practices to ensure that supply is roughly commensurate with demand. DoD Directive 4500.56 (DoD Policy on the Use of Government Aircraft and Air Travel) limits use of military aircraft to official needs. Other needs must be met through commercial means.
Is the program design free of major flaws that would limit the program's effectiveness or efficiency?
Explanation: The air transport system is designed to ensure it meets the needs of the Services and combatant commanders to deliver required items in the times needed in peace and war. The air transport system, run by Air Mobility Command, is part of a larger system that also incorporates sealift and land transport. It uses both organic aircraft and commercial carriers to provide the airlift capacity. The air transport segment is designed to provide the most urgently needed materials quickly. Seen at the strategic level, the program is designed well and has long used a mixture of commercial and organic assets to fulfill its mission.
Evidence: The airlift transportation system draws upon civilian and military assets in an effective manner to meet program objectives. The strategic air transportation policy or doctrine was made official in the National Airlift Policy (NSDD-280) signed by President Reagan and the system and member responsibilities are described in more detail in "Joint Doctrine for the DTS" (Joint Publication 4-01, Chapter 3).
Is the program design effectively targeted so that resources will address the program's purpose directly and will reach intended beneficiaries?
Explanation: In many ways, program resources are targeted well. The program's airlift system includes a strategic infrastructure allowing global reach to virtually any location in the world within a matter of hours. Infrastructure includes strategic placement of aerial ports and maintenance materiel/manpower. As evidenced in Operation Iraqi Freedom, USTRANSCOM ensures that airlift resources are used where and when needed. Operational plans are reviewed to ensure they are really feasible. The DoD uses Air Clearance Authority representatives from each command to ensure that those users most in need of airlift will receive support. Additionally, the program employs a route validation process to regularly review airlift volume and assess effectiveness/efficiency of airlift transportation resources.
Evidence: USTRANSCOM hosts Time Phased Force Deployment Document (TPFDD) conferences to address airlift requirements and to ensure that user requirements are adjudicated when requests exceed capacity. "Joint Doctrine for the DTS" (Joint Publication 4-01) governs the priorities for airlift in planning and execution. Each war plan is analyzed against the TPFDD and airlift allocated accordingly. Other Sources: National Airlift Policy (NSDD-280); Enroute Infrastructure Steering Committee Guidance
|Section 1 - Program Purpose & Design||Score||100%|
|Section 2 - Strategic Planning|
Does the program have a limited number of specific long-term performance measures that focus on outcomes and meaningfully reflect the purpose of the program?
Explanation: DoD's primary advertised measure is of millions of ton-miles shipped per day (MTM/D). However, timeliness of deliveries and accuracy of delivery are equally vital and, to serve the warfighter effectively, all three of these major measures must be used. The MTM/D measure is recognized by USTRANSCOM and the Air Force as being only a rough measure of capacity and planners would like to develop a more useful metric for shipment capacity. Timeliness measures are well established and accuracy measures exist. The capacity meaure, however, is currently insufficient to guide multi-billion dollar investment decisions in future airlift assets and will have to be refined and reviewed with an eye toward the effect of operational factors on needed and available capacity in order to be useful in assessing the need to increase system capacity beyond current plans.
Evidence: MRS-05 (to be replaced by the Mobility Capabilities Study (MCS)) establishes the capacity requirement. AF Pamphlet 10-1403 establishes the formulas for measuring capacity. Annual AMC Command Data Books document some other aspects of the performance of the command. The system that establishes the frequency of shipments along the pipelines is the Time-Definite Delivery (TDD) standard system, set out in DoD (Regulation) 4140.1-R.
Does the program have ambitious targets and timeframes for its long-term measures?
Explanation: DoD has ambitious targets and timeframes for system capacity and timeliness, but does not have as well developed measures for accuracy of delivery. Capacity targets are set at levels established by the Office of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Office of the Secretary of Defense and HQ Air Force. The DOD strategic airlift capacity requirement, outlined in MRS-05, is 54.5 million-ton miles per day (MTM/D) to achieve warfighting objectives with an acceptable level of risk. Targets for timeliness of deliveries are addressed through agreements with the other DoD organizations that the air transportation system serves. USTRANSCOM works with its customers to reduce accuracy problems, but because most of those problems seem to be generated by problems with customer documentation (as inputs), no comparable targets exist for accuracy. USTRANSCOM, however, provides much feedback to its customers on input discrepancies in an effort to drive down discrepancies.
Evidence: Evidence for the capacity targets is as follows: The MRS-05 Executive Summary states "The DoD should develop a program to provide between 51.1 MTM/D and 54.5 MTM/D of airlift capacity." AMC's budget request materials and AMC HQ Form 312 (containing commercial carrier--"CRAF"--commitments) describe the evolving path to reach the CRAF capacity target. Air Force Pamphlet 10-1403 ("Air Mobility Planning Factors") outlines the baseline MTM/D calculation methodology and planning factors. Evidence for timeliness targets and measures is contained in the Time-Definite Delivery system and in Intermodal Distribution Lanes reports provided to customer commands.
Does the program have a limited number of specific annual performance measures that can demonstrate progress toward achieving the program's long-term goals?
Explanation: USTRANSCOM has annual measures for system capacity and timeliness of delivery and surrogates for accuracy of delivery. These measures serve effectively as indicators of how well the system is serving the customer or could serve the customer in times of peak demand.
Evidence: Sources: Channel Performance & Analysis Report; Metrics Handbook for Mobility Air Forces; AMC Health of the Fleet Briefing; Monthly Business Review to Commander, USTRANSCOM; and USTRANSCOM Quarterly Execution Review.
Does the program have baselines and ambitious targets for its annual measures?
Explanation: DoD has baselines and ambitious targets for system capacity and timeliness, as well as surrogates for accuracy. These measures allow USTRANSCOM to tell reasonably well how well the system is performing. Measures listed in 2.3 are monitored periodically and operational indicators are monitored continuously and together are used effectively to adjust performance on a quarter-by-quarter, week-by-week or hour-by-hour basis. The annual metrics are ambitious but must be augmented with other metrics in order to keep the system working effectively hour-by-hour.
Evidence: Sources: Channel Performance & Analysis Report; Metrics Handbook for Mobility Air Forces; USTRANSCOM Quarterly Execution Review.
Do all partners (including grantees, sub-grantees, contractors, cost-sharing partners, and other government partners) commit to and work toward the annual and/or long-term goals of the program?
Explanation: Commercial air carriers sign annual contracts that pledge aircraft toward meeting the long-term goal of projecting and sustaining national military capabilities. The Air Force commits to aircraft acquisition and modernization to support capacity requirements. For the most part, Services and combatant commands work toward the establishment of the long-term goal by stating requirements and programming funds to meet the cost of the majority--but not all--of airlift needs.
Evidence: Commercial carriers provide 38% of the 54.5 MTM/D requirement established in MRS-05. In FY2004, these Civil Researve Air Fleet ("CRAF") partners from 40 commercial companies contributed 285 passenger and cargo aircraft to meet program objectives. Additionally, they carried 606,993 troops and 6,801 short tons of cargo in 10,308 missions (USTRANSCOM Annual Command Report, FY2004.) The DOD International Services Contract is used to commit commercial aircraft to the CRAF. The Mobility Requirements Study-05 (MRS-05) and ongoing Mobility Capacity Study (MCS) are a DOD-wide collaborative effort to determine total airlift needs. DOD program documentation details Military Service efforts to achieve the long-term goals. Other sources include Air Force Acquisition Budgets (e.g., C-17 acquisition and C-5 Modernization); USTRANSCOM Integrated Priority List; USTRANSCOM International Agreements
Are independent evaluations of sufficient scope and quality conducted on a regular basis or as needed to support program improvements and evaluate effectiveness and relevance to the problem, interest, or need?
Explanation: Although evaluations are performed frequently on various aspects of the program, the reviews are either not comprehensive (across the entire scope of operations) or are not completely independent. This creates the possibility that the reviews are not thoroughly objective. The Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) and the Joint Staff (Office of the Joint Chiefs of Staff) conduct periodic evaluations of some aspects of the airlift system to support the National Military Strategy but they are conducted by people with some connections to the program. Commercial Air Carriers participating in the Air Transportation System are subjected to an on-site survey to ensure quality and safety prior to entry into the system and an on-site survey is completed biennially thereafter but are conducted by USTRANSCOM personnel. A performance evaluation is completed every 6 months between the bi-ennial survey using industry, company, and FAA data to detect problems. More frequent on-site surveys or performance evaluations may be completed in response to detected problems or at the Commercial Airlift Review Board's direction.
Evidence: DOD-directed studies (not independent), conducted by the OSD and Joint Staff, have included the Mobility Study, Mobility Requirements Study, Mobility Requirements Study Bottom Up Review, Mobility Requirements Study-05, the on-going Mobility Capability Study, the on-going Operational Availability Studies, Semiannual Deficiency Reviews, and the Joint Quarterly Readiness Review.
Are Budget requests explicitly tied to accomplishment of the annual and long-term performance goals, and are the resource needs presented in a complete and transparent manner in the program's budget?
Explanation: USTRANSCOM works with AMC, the Office of the Secretary of Defense, and the Office of the Joint Chiefs of Staff on budget requests through DoD's Planning Programming Budgeting and Execution process on inputs to meet annual and long-term goals. It is a collaborative process to ensure that those items most needed receive the necessary resources within DoD budget totals. Funding requests are requirements-driven. USTRANSCOM's Transportation Working Capital Fund (TWCF) budget links Service airlift transportation requirements to available resources, and provides incentives for commercial carriers to participate in the CRAF program.
Evidence: The TWCF charges users for most of their resource use and the workings of the fund are visible to the users. Air Force acquisition requests and budgets incorporate requests for aircraft acquisition and major modifications, such as C-17 aircraft aquisition and the C-5 aircraft Reliability Enhancement and Re-Engining Program (RERP). USTRANSCOM's Integrated Priority List is developed annually and lists in order of priority those resources that are required to achieve air mobility goals and is provided to the Office of the Joint Chiefs of Staff ("Joint Staff"). Volume III of The Air Mobility Master Plan contains AMC's input to the Air Force Capabilities Investment Strategy (AFCIS). AFCIS provides for a resource allocation process and looks out 18 years. This volume translates long-range planning objectives into funded programs to ensure that the required mobility capabilities are on hand.
Has the program taken meaningful steps to correct its strategic planning deficiencies?
Explanation: USTRANSCOM responded to congressional direction to update air mobility requirements by delivering the Report to Congress on the Relevancy of MRS-05. Based on this report, Commander USTRANSCOM re-estimated the MTM/D target. In addition, the Department is in the midst of two major programs to track individual shipments and inventory items that will greatly improve in-transit visibility and should allow better tracking of delivery times and accuracy.
Evidence: Report to Congress titled Relevancy of MRS-05, reports on the Radio Frequency Identification system and the Unit Identification System.
|Section 2 - Strategic Planning||Score||88%|
|Section 3 - Program Management|
Does the agency regularly collect timely and credible performance information, including information from key program partners, and use it to manage the program and improve performance?
Explanation: USTRANSCOM works with AMC and the Joint Staff to collect performance information on the individual airlift aircraft programs, and uses the data to inform senior leadership and make program decisions. Information is aggregated at the aerial port level, theater level, by aircraft, etc. USTRANSCOM and AMC staff provide the following performance indicators to its senior leadership: number of missions by theater; review of upcoming near-term scheduled deployments; status of/reason for aircraft in "not mission capable" status for greater than 48 hours; weekly percent of cargo flights meeting on-time performance standards; recent and upcoming aircraft commitment levels; status of force deployment and closure (completion of movement). USTRANSCOM/AMC uses this information to make decisions regarding an array of issues, to include redirecting aircraft when needed, adjusting aircraft scheduling and dispatching maintenance recovery teams. AMC uses automated queries of operational databases to perform the analysis of air transportation system data. Program progress reflecting performance in cost, schedule, and attainment of system performance parameters by both the program office and the contractors is collected and reported.
Evidence: Sources: AMC daily airlift operations summary briefings to AMC Senior Leadership; weekly operations update to Commander, USTRANSCOM; Monthly Business Review to Commander, USTRANSCOM; Quarterly Execution Review provided by USTRANSCOM to OUSD(C); Monthly Financial Reports provided by AMC to USTRANSCOM; Channel Performance and Analysis Report.
Are Federal managers and program partners (including grantees, sub-grantees, contractors, cost-sharing partners, and other government partners) held accountable for cost, schedule and performance results?
Explanation: System Program Office (SPO) directors are held accountable for program cost, schedule, and performance. Additionally, the SPO is accountable for documented program performance parameters within the constraints of current acquisition law and budgets. Customers set required delivery dates. That information is tracked and briefed routinely to the senior leadership chain of command (Commander, Tanker Airlift Control Center (TACC) and the USTRANSCOM Director of Operations) to ensure program performance. In addition, contract operations include clauses requiring specific support levels. International Carriers are graded on contract service quality and schedule reliability. Contractual actions are taken on carriers performing less than standard. Acquisition directives assign accountability to program managers for cost, schedule, and performance. Contractual requirements are stated in performance terms and built into all contracts. Managers are held accountable for costs associated with meeting program delivery dates.
Evidence: AMC Instruction 65-101 established the Budget Advisory Board (BAB). The BAB is directly responsible to AMC Vice Commander for recommending appropriate HQ AMC policy and courses of action on financial matters pertaining to HQ AMC appropriated funds and the Transportation Working Capital Fund (TWCF) programs. The BAB is also responsible for maintaining continued surveillance of HQ AMC financial capability and programs to carry out assigned missions. The USTRANSCOM Comptroller conducts a monthly business review with the Commander, USTRANSCOM, which includes overview of financial management activities and performance indicators. Other Sources: DoD 4140.1R "DoD Supply Chain Materiel Management Regulation 23 May 2003" App 8, Time Definite Delivery Standards for Intermodal Distribution Lanes.AMC daily airlift operations summary briefings to AMC Senior Leadership; AMC Commercial Air contracts.
Are funds (Federal and partners') obligated in a timely manner and spent for the intended purpose?
Explanation: AMC's Transportation Working Capital Fund (TWCF) budget provides funding for airlift mission support, with financial oversight of timely budget execution. Air Mobility Command's portion of the TWCF budget is limited to requirements tied to support of the airlift mission. TWCF does not fund total support of AMC base operations/headquarters functions. USTRANSCOM monthly business reviews include a review of obligation and expenditure data to ensure that funds are obligated in accordance with DoD standards. DOD budget reviews of capital acquisition programs include a review of obligation and expenditure data to ensure that funds are obligated in accordance with DOD standards. Funds are obligated and expended in a timely manner and funds are spent only for activities that contribute to the air transport mission. While AMC and USTRANSCOM senior leadership are briefed daily and weekly on performance of the airlift mission, DoD financial statements are currently not considered auditable by OMB (see 3.6). However, USTRANSCOM, under the Defense Enterprise Accounting Management System (DEAMS) program management office, is building an accounting system with capability to equip AMC with auditable financial statements.
Evidence: All AMC TWCF funding is in support of airlift operations. 90% of requirements in AMC's FY06 Budget Estimate were directly tied to cost of doing business (fuel, commercial augmentation, aircraft maintenance, etc). Only 2% went to personnel costs, and 8% went to support infrastructure (facility maintenance/utilities, non-aircrew travel, support equipment, etc). Costs chargeable and not chargeable to TWCF are outlined in AMC Instruction 65-602. DOD Financial Management Regulation outlines Working Capital Fund Execution Procedures. Other Sources: Monthly Business Review to Commander, USTRANSCOM; Quarterly Execution Review provided by USTRANSCOM to OUSD(C); Monthly Financial Reports provided by AMC to USTRANSCOM.
Does the program have procedures (e.g. competitive sourcing/cost comparisons, IT improvements, appropriate incentives) to measure and achieve efficiencies and cost effectiveness in program execution?
Explanation: USTRANSCOM components, including AMC, provide a Productivity/Streamlining initiatives exhibit, along with efficiency measures, in their budget requests. AMC and USTRANSCOM have structured boards and processes to advise senior leaders on financial matters, including efficiencies. AMC's Budget Advisory Board (BAB) develops recommendations for changes in the available financial resources utilization within the organization. Recurring analysis updates the picture of mobility airlift assets. Those assets are balanced against the CRAF program to maximize airlift capacity while spending the least amount to achieve strategic requirements. However, a difference between costs and receipts is made up by subsidies supplied by USTRANSCOM and results in potential inefficiency in matching supply and demand (the subsidy is provided by treating training as external to service and using training funds). Because commands set their own requirements for timeliness of cargo shipments, some commands in in non-war theaters require more urgent service than other commands or sub-commands in theaters of war (e.g., Iraq). Charging the commands directly for urgency of service--especially as utilization approaches capacity--may result in significant changes in requirements for speed of service. In addition, rates charged do not provide for any portion of the capitalization of the aircraft used (or some other major "fixed" costs). The Department may need to change its method of charging for the last legs of supply missions to recoup a larger part of thel costs of shipping or find some other mechanism to adjust priorities (demand for service) to align command demands with the Department's overall priorities.
Evidence: AMC has documented over $900 million in productivity and streamlining initiatives since FY94. They include a broad cross section of initiatives, including reduced flying hour program, wing-level C-5 aircraft engine repair, lower flying hour upgrade points, transferring flying hours from cockpit to simulator, adjusting the size of Patriot Express (the charter service transporting re-assigned military members and families), and introducing regional package cargo rates. Efficiency measures are budgeted and tracked monthly. They include package cargo capacity utilization, average pallet weight, and Patriot Express capacity utilization. Sources: AMC's FY06 Transportation Working Capital Fund Program; AMC Daily Operations Brief; Monthly Business Review to Commander, USTRANSCOM; Quarterly Execution Review provided by USTRANSCOM to Office of the Secretary of Defense (Comptroller); Monthly Financial Reports provided by AMC to USTRANSCOM; AMC Iinstruction 10-402, Chapter 2.2; AMC Instruction 65-101 Para 3.3.4 USTRANSCOM outlines appropriate procedures for Information Technology program execution through the Chief Information Officer Program Review Panel (CPRP) (Sources: USTRANSCOM Instruction 33-34 and USTRANSCOM CPRP Process Handbook)
Does the program collaborate and coordinate effectively with related programs?
Explanation: USTRANSCOM coordinates the activities of all three of its components (air, land, and sea) to avoid duplication of effort. USTRANSCOM also works closely with Defense Logistics Agency and other DoD partners, to limit and reduce seams in the distribution pipeline. AMC works closely with commercial partners participating in the Civil Reserve Air Fleet. USTRANSCOM also works closely with its user community to be responsive to their transportation needs. In addition, new Delivery and Distribution Operations Centers (DDOCs) provide more responsive supply operations to the theater commands through forward distribution operations centers in overseas regions. The Central Command (CENTCOM) DDOC is notable for its close coordination with USTRANSCOM HQ in responding to CENTCOM's supply needs in Iraq.
Evidence: USTRANSCOM has continually pursued efforts to reduce and eliminate the number and scope of total "seams" in the transportation process, with an additional recent focus on distribution. In September, 2003, the Secretary of Defense designated USTRANSCOM's Commander as the chief of DoD's supply distribution process (he is the "DoD Distribution Process Owner" (DPO)). The DPO has a significant span of influence over the entire distribution pipeline, from item procurement to asset disposal, including distribution from warehouse to front-line war fighter. Efforts thus far have improved efficiency: USTRANSCOM's DDOCs resulted in $418M in savings, due to better oversight of distribution from the overseas terminals to final customer. The effort was a collaboration between AMC, USTRANSCOM's surface commands, and DLA. Other sources include DTCI Overview Briefing; Joint Publication 4.0.
Does the program use strong financial management practices?
Explanation: DoD's financial management weaknesses are well-documented. While DoD continues to make efforts to improve them, the Department has yet to obtain an unqualified audit opinion. The organizations contributing to the ATS review do not have audit reports demonstrating that the ATS program is free from internal weaknesses. Moreover, DoD's plan to obtain a department-wide unqualified audit opinion has continued to slip from its planned milestones, which warrants a "no" for this question.
Evidence: None of DoD's reports or audits specifically cite the ATS program for material financial weaknesses; however none of the audits specifically looked at that aspect of the program. Numerous audits document DoD's financial management weaknesses. Because of the magnitude of its problems, DoD is unlikely to obtain an unqualified opinion for some time.
Has the program taken meaningful steps to address its management deficiencies?
Explanation: AMC and USTRANSCOM have implemented Management Control Programs to address management deficiencies. AMC and USTRANSCOM implemented a management control (MC) program in support of the Financial Manager's Financial Integrity Act (FMFIA), Public Law 97-255. MC programs' internal controls are operational checks and balances that prevent loss due to fraud, waste, abuse, and mismanagement of government resources. It includes separation of duties, supervision, computer system controls, periodic reviews and quality assurance evaluation reviews, and other procedures ensuring proper management of Air Force resources.
Evidence: Sources: "AMC Management Control Program Guide in Support of the Federal Managers' Financial Integrity Act", updated February 2004 USTRANSCOM INSTRUCTION 65-3, "Managers Internal Control (MIC) Program"
|Section 3 - Program Management||Score||86%|
|Section 4 - Program Results/Accountability|
Has the program demonstrated adequate progress in achieving its long-term performance goals?
Explanation: The program doesn't yet have in place a comprehensive set of goals and procedures to address problems of accuracy of delivery, so the answer to this question is limited to "Large Extent". AMC continues to progress towards the capacity goal through continued acquisition of C-17 aircraft, as well as modernization programs designed to enhance C-5 aircraft efficiency and effectiveness, which increase system capacity. A close relationship with CRAF participants ensures the viability of that critical element to the goal. However, AMC has moved cargo away from CRAF, which may hurt the CRAF program in the long run. The airlift investment program is nearing completion of the planned C-17 program, which increases airlift capabilities. Attainment of the inter-theater airlift capacity is dependent on fielding C-17s, modernization of C-5 aircraft and a viable CRAF system. USTRANSOM is also implementing tracking systems that will significantly improve the visibility of assets while being moved in the air transportation system. Some customers routinely drive up AMC's tracking costs and slow their operations much more than other customers. One way to improve the quality of tracking data provided to AMC by the customer might be to levy a surcharge to those customers that routinely provide poor information.
Evidence: Air Force FY06 Program and Budget Review, and AMC Command Data Book (CDB). The CDB contains data that tracks the MTM/Day Capacity entries from past years (excluding KC-10 contribution) and include: 42.2 MTM/Day in FY01; 44.4 MTM/Day in FY03; and 49.6 MTM/Day projected by FY07. Increasing deliveries of C-17 aircraft to replace the C-141 has resulted in rising inter-theater transport capabilities. The C-5 engine upgrades program is planned to become operational in 2010, further increasing inter-theater capabilities. Sources include TWCF Budget Justification Materials provided as part of the FY 2006 Budget. Additional source: Monthly "No Hit" [Discrepancy] Report.
Does the program (including program partners) achieve its annual performance goals?
Explanation: Annual performance progress relates primarily to making incremental progress in airlift capabilities. The C-17 Multi-year Procurement (MYP) continues to meet stated program goals, the C-5 avionics and engine upgrade programs are progressing in accordance with scheduled milestones, and the CRAF program meets requirements. Apart from the upgrade programs, C-5 aircraft mission capable rates have shown improvement since FY2000. In addition, channel cargo delivery standards are performing well against targets. However, about one third of packages shipped via the air transport system have a "discrepancy" note against them at some point in their shipment. This includes packages that lack documentation early in the process, misdeliveries and other anomalies. USTRANSCOM has identified this problem and is working on lowering the discrepancy rate, but with such a high rate, much work needs to be done. DoD's in-transit visibility rate is increasing, which will help improve accuracy problems.
Evidence: Monthly Financial Reports provided by AMC to USTRANSCOM; Monthly Business Review to Commander, USTRANSCOM; Channel Performance and Analysis Report (routine/normal package shipping); AMC Health of the Fleet Briefing.
Does the program demonstrate improved efficiencies or cost effectiveness in achieving program goals each year?
Explanation: The evidence here is mixed. USTRANSCOM components, including AMC, provide a Productivity/Streamlining initiatives exhibit, along with efficiency measure, in their budget requests. CRAF continues to generate efficiencies by providing low-cost civilian transport options when such choice is mission-effective. AMC has documented over $900 million in productivity and streamlining initiatives since FY94. (See the Evidence Section of 3.4.) One notable example of introduction of a useful efficiency is the USTRANSCOM-Army "Clean Pallets" program. Army forces in Iraq have requested that air pallets be assembled entirely of goods for final delivery to a single location. In return for this stringent requirement, the Army accepts delivery on a slightly slower pace to the final air destination in theater. This actually speeds delivery of equipment to the soldier, as less re-assembly of pallets or truckloads must be done before goods are handed off to successive units in the delivery and distribution chain. However, there seems to be sub-optimal assignment of certain key resources. Aircraft sometimes are based at locations that require repositioning before picking up their loads (although the pick-up locations are predictable and may house their own organic assets), then require further re-positioning before being sent on their delivery mission, though the pick-up location could allow direct debarkation. Although large improvements have been made in computerized tracking of flights and in the planning and management of those flights, the quality of reports recording flight irregularities is low enough that the data can't be used as inputs for pattern analysis that could identify subtle trends and help in redirecting infrastructure resources to increase output. The quality of the data also couldn't support its use as inputs to computer models to determine how to base and use aircraft optimally. Organic flight load factors are significantly below the maximum that should be possible. This is due to a number of factors, including a system that, during peacetime operations, emphasizes the ability to keep on schedule over efficiency of operations. However, it's not clear that TRANSCOM has a mechansim to test the ability of portions of the system to generate high load factors, high utilization rates, etc., that would be demanded in a very high materiel throughput situation (high mobilization and very high consumption rates) that drive system capacity targets. It should be noted that not all of USTRANSCOM's claimed efficiencies may be valid. Some of their claimed savings have resulted from the transfer of some commercial carrier assignments back to the organic fleet. However, this transfer, if used to justify future aircraft purchases, could result in increased overall costs compared to using commercial fleets for some larger portion of that mission.
Evidence: Sources: AMC's FY06 Transportation Working Capital Funding budget documents. AMC C-5 engine upgrade projections on mission capable rate (aircraft ready to perform mission) and maintenance cost improvements; C-5 Fleet Viability Board report; TWCF budget justification materials provided as part of the FY 2006 Budget.
Does the performance of this program compare favorably to other programs, including government, private, etc., with similar purpose and goals?
Explanation: No civilian or government program shares USTRANSCOM's mission or goals. USTRANSCOM's airlift system is unique in scope of operations and responsibility. Although commercial shipping services like FedEx or UPS provide services similar to part of what USTRANSCOM does, there are significant differences in the geographic scope and environment of operations which make comparison of performance difficult. See 1.3.
Do independent evaluations of sufficient scope and quality indicate that the program is effective and achieving results?
Explanation: A number of recent studies have indicated that specific aspects of the air transportation system are effective means of distribution and delivery. However, none of those studies have been both independent (using expert review panels composed of members with no financial ties or reporting chains to USTRANSCOM or the US Air Force) and of broad scope (see 2.6).
Evidence: Sources: The Institute for Defense Analysis (IDA) conducted a study of Sustaining the CRAF program (May 2003), noting is "an effective collaboration between the government and the U.S aviation industry".
|Section 4 - Program Results/Accountability||Score||50%|