O-MM-0087 DON Comments on MJCSG Military Value Report Page: 1 of 2
View a full description of this book.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
DCN: 10675
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY
(INSTALLATIONS AND ENVIRONMENT)
1000 NAVY PENTAGON 26 February 2004
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20350-1000
MEMORANDUM FOR DIRECTOR, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE
SUBJECT: DON comments on the Medical Joint Cross-Service Group Military Value Report
We have conducted a detailed review of the draft Medical Joint Cross-Service Group
Military Value Report, and provide the following recommendations to make the written report a
more complete product.
Major Concern:
1. Military Value is currently being measured in the report by the following subgroups -
Education and Training, Market, RD&A, and Infrastructure. These subgroups do not easily lend
themselves to analysis in the BRAC process. As a specific example, Infrastructure is an input, not a
product or a function, and might be more appropriately rolled into each of the other sub-group
functions. For example, once combined with Infrastructure, Medical/Dental Market Requirements
may be more appropriately entitled Medical/Dental Services. We understand the MJCSG is aware
of this issue and is working on a solution. Related to this issue are the following:
* Medical and Dental Market Requirements should be evaluated in a consistent
manner. Currently 100% of the weight for the Dental Market is placed within the
mission criteria. In comparison, the Medical and Veterinary Market sections place
35% and 30% of the Military Value weights on the cost criteria, respectively. While
dental care is provided specifically for the active duty population and is an element
of readiness, it is not clear that civilian care is not a viable option for some in-
garrison dental care, particularly because "civilian capacity" is one of the two dental
market attributes described. Thus, it is not clear why the cost criteria is not weighted
in the Dental Market.
* While the Military Value Report details the military value of the Veterinary Market,
the only question (DoD #540) in the Capacity Data Call is a yes/no question about
whether or not an activity provides veterinary support. From a modeling standpoint,
this will make it difficult to define what veterinary services can be closed or
realigned based on military value if no measures of capacity and requirements are
available. If the Military Value of the Veterinary Market is to be defined, additional
capacity/requirements concerning veterinary support appear appropriate.
Specific Recommendations:1. In Appendix A, the Metric - Student Enrichment to MHS is associated with questions
asking "Would the level of services offered at your treatment facility decrease if graduate education
programs were eliminated from your facility?" It is reasonable to assume all activities will answerDraft Deliberative Document - For Discussion Purposes Only
Do Not Release Under FOIA
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This book can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Book.
United States. Department of Defense. O-MM-0087 DON Comments on MJCSG Military Value Report, book, October 10, 2005; (https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc22648/m1/1/: accessed April 25, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, UNT Digital Library, https://digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.