Welcome to Scribd. Sign in or start your free trial to enjoy unlimited e-books, audiobooks & documents.Find out more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword or section
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1


Ratings: (0)|Views: 660|Likes:

More info:

Published by: Project On Government Oversight on Mar 26, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





U.S. Army Audit Agency
Foreign Language ProgramTraining and Proficiency
Offices of the Deputy Chief of Staff, G-2and the Deputy Chief of Staff, G-1
Audit Report: A-2010-0141-ZBI
22 July 2010
Executive Summary
Audit Report A-2010-0141-ZBI22 July 2010
Foreign Language Program – Training and Proficiency
Offices of the Deputy Chief of Staff, G-2 and the Deputy Chief of Staff, G-1
We audited the Army’s processes for:
Identifying candidates for entry into the Foreign LanguageProgram.
Determining training-space requirements at the Defense LanguageInstitute Foreign Language Center (DLIFLC).
Managing foreign language proficiency bonus (FLPB) pay.We concluded the Army needed to improve the process for identifyingrecruits with an aptitude to learn a foreign language, resulting inselection for foreign language training. Our analyses showed that only68.3 percent of FY 09 graduation candidates at DLIFLC completedcourse requirements, and only 55.6 percent achieved a minimumproficiency score. This occurred, in part, because the test used to assessrecruits’ aptitude for learning a foreign language (developed by DODand DLIFLC) wasn’t effective.We also concluded the Army needed to change its methodology forestimating the number of training spaces it needed at DLIFLC. Ouranalyses showed that the Army filled only 74 percent of the spaces itpaid for in FY 09 and only 73 percent in FY 08. This occurred becauseresponsible personnel relied solely on operational mission require-ments when identifying the spaces needed at DLIFLC, instead of alsoconsidering historical fill rates. If responsible personnel used historicalfill rates, along with operational mission requirements, and attemptedto achieve a fill rate of 90 percent, we estimate the Army could save anaverage of about $24.7 million annually.We found that the Army also needed to improve its management ofFLPB pay. Our statistical analysis of payments for May 2009 showedthat the Army made overpayments of about $1.3 million to unqualifiedSoldiers and underpayments of about $270,000 to qualified Soldiers.The pay errors occurred primarily because the Army didn’t have acentralized process to monitor and track eligible Soldiers by position,foreign language skill, pay rate, and category. Developing a centralizedmonitoring process would significantly improve the accuracy of FLPBpay. We estimated the Army could reduce overpayments by about$12.6 million annually.
We recommended that theDeputy Chief of Staff, G-2:
Coordinate with DOD,DLIFLC, and the other DODServices to analyze andadjust, as appropriate, theDefense Language AptitudeBattery test.
Develop and implement amethodology andprocedures to use acombination of operationalmission requirements andhistorical fill rates todetermine training spacerequirements at DLIFLC.We recommended that theDeputy Chief of Staff, G-1:
Develop a centralizedprocess to monitor FLPB payand designate an activity toimplement the process.The Offices of the Deputy Chiefof Staff, G-2 and the DeputyChief of Staff, G-1 agreed withthe recommendations and/oroffered acceptable alternativeactions. The offices agreed therewas a potential for monetarybenefits. The offices’ commentsrepresent the official Armyposition.
22 July 2010Deputy Chief of Staff, G-1Deputy Chief of Staff, G-2This is the report on our audit of the Foreign Language Program – Training andProficiency.We conducted the audit in accordance with generally accepted government auditingstandards.Recommendations A-1 and A-2 are addressed to the Deputy Chief of Staff, G-2;Recommendation B-1 is addressed to the Deputy Chief of Staff, G-1. If the Deputy Chiefof Staff, G-1 and Deputy Chief of Staff, G-2 carry out the recommendations, there shouldbe monetary benefits, based on estimates we could reasonably make at the time of theaudit.Verbatim comments on the conclusions and recommendations are in Annex D. Foradditional information about this report, contact the Intelligence and Security AuditsDivision at 703-428-7222.I appreciate the courtesies and cooperation extended to us during the audit.FOR THE AUDITOR GENERAL:DAVID FIGUEROAProgram DirectorIntelligence and Security Audits

Activity (2)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 thousand reads
1 hundred reads

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->