Army Training - Evaluations of Units' Proficiency Are Not Always Reliable: Nsiad-91-72 (Paperback)

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO reviewed Army systems for evaluating collective training and the use of evaluation results to report units' combat readiness, focusing on the: (1) reliability and usefulness of collective training evaluations to assess active Army and National Guard units' proficiency in performing their wartime mission tasks; and (2) validity of training readiness reports for active Army units. GAO found that: (1) unrealistic conditions of home-station training limited the usefulness of evaluations; (2) home-station training evaluations failed to include some mission-essential tasks; (3) emphasis on evaluating unit proficiency varied among different training exercises and divisions; (4) combat training centers (CTC) provided the most realistic evaluation of unit proficiency; (5) CTC evaluations indicated that units were less ready than reported by home-station and readiness reports; (6) readiness reports might not adequately consider reduced training opportunities and changes in unit leadership; and (7) Army assessment criteria were too ambiguous to ensure consistent assessments among units. GAO also found that evaluations of Army National Guard units' proficiency were based on: (1) training that did not adequately simulate combat situations; and (2) limited observations that resulted in general and conflicting information.