United States Government Accountability Office Report to Congressional Committees June 2021 NAVY READINESS Actions Needed to Evaluate and Improve Surface Warfare Officer Career Path GAO-21-168 June 2021 NAVY READINESS Actions Needed to Evaluate and Improve Surface Warfare Officer Career Path Highlights of GAO-21-168, a report to congressional committees Why GAO Did This Study What GAO Found SWOs are U.S. Navy officers whose U.S. Navy Surface Warfare Officers (SWOs) separate from the SWO community primary duties focus on the safe earlier and at higher rates compared with officers in similar U.S. Navy operation of surface ships at sea. In communities, and female SWOs separate at higher rates than male SWOs. 2017, the Navy had two collisions at sea that resulted in the death of 17 Retention Rates for U.S. Navy Officers and Surface Warfare Officers by Gender sailors and hundreds of millions of dollars in damage to Navy ships. Following the collisions, the Navy identified deficiencies in the SWO career path and staffing policies, and took action to improve these areas. The John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 contained a provision that GAO assess issues related to the Note: GAO compared the U.S. Navy Surface Warfare Officer community separation rates with those U.S. Navy SWO career path. Among of the other unrestricted line officer communities in the U.S. Navy: Naval Aviation, Submarine, and other things, this report (1) assesses Explosive Ordinance Disposal and Special Warfare. trends in separation rates of SWOs GAO found that after 10 years of service, around the first major career milestone: with those of similar U.S. Navy officer • 33 percent of SWOs remain in their community, compared with 45 percent of communities, and trends in SWO separation rates by gender; (2) officers from similar U.S. Navy officer communities, and describes how the career path of U.S. • 12 percent of female SWOs remain in their community, compared with 39 Navy SWOs compares to those of percent of male SWOs. selected foreign navies and other By using existing information to develop a plan to improve SWO retention, the U.S. Navy and U.S. maritime Navy will be better positioned to retain a diverse and combat-ready community. communities; and (3) assesses the extent to which the U.S. Navy has The career path for U.S. Navy SWOs differs from those in similar positions in used or evaluated alternative career selected foreign navies and other U.S. Navy and U.S. maritime communities. paths. GAO analyzed U.S. Navy officer personnel data; selected Career Path for U.S. Navy Surface Warfare Officers Compared with Others foreign navies and U.S. maritime officer communities for comparison; and surveyed a generalizable sample of Navy SWOs. What GAO Recommends GAO is making 7 recommendations to the Navy, including developing a plan to improve SWO retention; regularly evaluating its current approaches, including alternative career paths; and using these to improve SWO career options and The U.S. Navy made incremental career path changes for SWOs following the proficiency. The Navy concurred with 2017 collisions, but has not regularly evaluated or fundamentally changed its GAO's recommendations. SWO career path for over a century. GAO found that by a factor of four to one, SWOs believe specialized career paths would better prepare them for their duties than the current generalist career path. Without periodic evaluations of current View GAO-21-168. For more information, approaches, including alternative career paths, and the use of those evaluations, contact Cary Russell at (202) 512-5431 or [email protected]. the U.S. Navy may miss an opportunity to develop and retain proficient SWOs. United States Government Accountability Office Contents Letter 1 Background 6 SWOs Separate Earlier and at Higher Rates Compared with Officers in Similar U.S. Navy Communities, and Female SWOs Separate at Higher Rates than Males 10 The U.S. Navy’s Commissioning Practices Limit Surface Warfare Officer Training Opportunities aboard Ships 19 The Career Path for U.S. Navy SWOs Differs from Officers in Selected Foreign Navies and Other U.S. Navy and U.S. Maritime Communities 28 The U.S. Navy Has Recently Made Incremental Career Path Changes for SWOs, but Has Not Regularly Evaluated Alternative Career Path and Proficiency Models 37 Conclusions 48 Recommendations for Executive Action 49 Agency Comments and Our Evaluation 51 Appendix I Data Sources and Methods Used for Retention Analyses 54 Appendix II Nominal Cost of the U.S. Navy Surface Warfare, Aviation, and Submarine Officer Career Paths 73 Appendix III Foreign Navy and U.S. Maritime Organization Profiles 78 Appendix IV Surface Warfare Officer Survey Questionnaire, Demographic Information, and Weighted Responses 113 Appendix V Objectives, Scope, and Methodology 138 Appendix VI Comments from the Department of the Navy 151 Page i GAO-21-168 Navy Readiness Appendix VII GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments 170 Tables Table 1: Summary of the Career Path Models for the U.S. Navy, Selected Foreign Navies, and the U.S. Coast Guard 29 Table 2: Characteristics of Commissioning Programs and Ship- Driving Training for Surface Warfare Officer Equivalents among the U.S. Navy, Selected Foreign Navies, and Other U.S. Navy and U.S. Maritime Communities 35 Table 3: Characteristics of Retention Practices for Surface Warfare Officer Equivalents among U.S. Navy, Selected Foreign Navies, and Other U.S. Navy and U.S. Maritime Communities 36 Table 4: Population Count of the U.S. Navy Unrestricted Line Officer Communities from July 2003 through March 2020 55 Table 5: Demographic Composition of the U.S. Navy Surface Warfare Officer (SWO) Community Compared with Other U.S. Navy Unrestricted Line (URL) Officer Communities 57 Table 6: Average Years of Service from Commissioning to Separation by U.S Navy Officer Community and Accession Source 58 Table 7: Number and Percent of Male and Female U.S. Navy Surface Warfare Officers (SWOs) during Calendar Years 2003 through 2020 58 Table 8: U.S. Navy Surface Warfare Officer (SWO) Community 10-year Retention Rate Compared with other U.S. Navy Unrestricted Line (URL) Officer Communities 60 Table 9: U.S. Navy Surface Warfare Officer Retention Rates Using the Life Table Method 61 Table 10: U.S. Navy Submarine Officer Retention Rates Using the Life Table Method 62 Table 11: U.S. Navy Aviation Officer Retention Rates Using the Life Table Method 63 Table 12: U.S. Navy Explosive Ordinance Disposal and Special Warfare Retention Rates Using the Life Table Method 64 Table 13: Male U.S. Navy Surface Warfare Officer Retention Rates Using the Life Table Method 65 Table 14: Female U.S. Navy Surface Warfare Officer Retention Rates Using the Life Table Method 66 Table 15: Bivariate Regression Results from Cox Proportional Hazard Model 68 Page ii GAO-21-168 Navy Readiness Table 16: Multivariate Regression Results from Cox Proportional Hazard Model 71 Table 17: Nominal Per-Officer Costs of the U.S. Navy Surface Warfare, Aviation, and Submarine Officer Career Paths through 23 Years of Commissioned Service 73 Table 18: Survey-Based Estimates of U.S. Navy Surface Warfare Officers Demographic Information 119 Table 19: Survey-Based Estimates Regarding the Number of Surface Warfare Officer (SWO) Commanding Officers U.S. Navy SWOs Have Worked For (n=343) 120 Table 20: Survey-Based Estimates Regarding the Effectiveness of Generalist Career Path in Developing U.S. Navy Commanding Officers 121 Table 21: Survey-Based Estimates Regarding Opportunities to Develop the Skills Needed to Perform Proficiently as a Surface Warfare Officer (SWO) (n=340) 122 Table 22: Survey-Based Estimates Regarding What Career Path Surface Warfare Officers (SWOs) Believe Would Best Prepare SWOs For Their Service in the United States Navy 124 Table 23: Survey-Based Estimates Regarding Surface Warfare Officers (SWO) Personal Preference of a Career Path Option 127 Table 24: Survey Responses from Junior Surface Warfare Officers: How Likely Would You be to Continue your Career After You Have Satisfied Your Current Service Requirement? 131 Table 25: Survey-Based Estimates from U.S. Navy Surface Warfare Officers Who Have Not Served as Commanding Officers on their Desire to Become a Commanding Officer 132 Table 26: Sample Design and Number of Responses 146 Figures Figure 1: Overview of Significant Mishaps at Sea for U.S. Navy Surface Ships, January–August 2017 7 Figure 2: Type and Number of U.S. Navy Surface Ships, as of April 2021 8 Figure 3: Career Progression and Key Duties U.S. Navy Surface Warfare Officers (SWOs) Perform Aboard Ships 9 Page iii GAO-21-168 Navy Readiness Figure 4: Retention Rates for Officers in Select U.S. Navy Communities, by Years of Service, Fiscal Year 2004 through March 2020 11 Figure 5: Nominal Personnel, Training, Retention, and Moving Costs of the U.S. Navy Surface Warfare Officer Career Path through 23 Years of Commissioned Service 14 Figure 6: Retention Rates for U.S. Navy Surface Warfare Officers, by Gender and Years of Service, Fiscal Years 2004 through March 2020 16 Figure 7: Female Representation in U.S. Navy Surface Warfare Officer Community, Calendar Years 2004 through 2020 18 Figure 8: U.S. Navy Surface Warfare Officer (SWO) Requirements for Ensigns aboard Ships and Ensign Over Execution, Fiscal Years 2017 through 2021 20 Figure 9: Average Years of Experience on Surface Ships for Nuclear-Trained and Non-Nuclear Trained Surface Warfare Officers 26 Figure 10: Selected Foreign Navies and U.S. Maritime Communities That Specialize Officer Career Paths by Ship Department Duties 31 Figure 11: Selected Foreign Navy and U.S. Maritime Community That Specialize Officer Career Paths by Ship Type 32 Figure 12: Survey-Based Estimates on What Career Path Would Best Prepare U.S.