This paper presents an analytic framework that builds from previous work to yield the systematic and defendable readiness analysis that must underlie decisions ranging from budget allocation to force employment and even strategy development. To manage readiness, the Department of Defense (DOD) must balance the supply and demand of deployable forces around the world. The readiness of an individual unit is the result of a series of time-intensive force generation processes that ultimately combine qualified people, working equipment, and unit training to produce military capabilities suitable for executing the defense strategy. Therefore, managing readiness is as much about understanding the complexities of human resource management and the technical details of weapons system availability as it is about measuring the ability of U.S. forces to support the national security strategy. Policymakers, military members and command leaders, plus senior Department of Defense team staff, ROTC, military science, and human resource management students may be interested in this illustrated resource about military readiness prior to national security situation deployments. Related products: Military Engagement and Forward Presence: Down But Not Out as Tools to Shape and Win is available here: https://bookstore.gpo.gov/products/military-engagement-and-forward-presence-down-not-out-tools-shape-and-win Russian Military Power: Building a Military To Support Great Power Aspirations is available here: https://bookstore.gpo.gov/products/russian-military-power-building-military-support-great-power-aspirations The Armed Forces Officer is available here: https://bookstore.gpo.gov/products/armed-forces-officer Other products produced by the US Army, National Defense University Press can be found here: https://bookstore.gpo.gov/agency/national-defense-university-ndu

The U.S. military has been continuously engaged in foreign conflicts for over two decades. The strains that these deployments, the associated increases in operational tempo, and the general challenges of military life affect not only service members but also the people who depend on them and who support them as they support the nation â€" their families. Family members provide support to service members while they serve or when they have difficulties; family problems can interfere with the ability of service members to deploy or remain in theater; and family members are central influences on whether members continue to serve. In addition, rising family diversity and complexity will likely increase the difficulty of creating military policies, programs and practices that adequately support families in the performance of military duties. Strengthening the Military Family Readiness System for a Changing American Society examines the challenges and opportunities facing military families and what is known about effective strategies for supporting and protecting military children and families, as well as lessons to be learned from these experiences. This report offers recommendations regarding what is needed to strengthen the support system for military families.

Throughout most of American history, U.S. military forces proved unready for the wars that were thrust upon them and suffered costly reverses in early battles. During the Cold War, for the first time, U.S. defense policy tried to maintain high readiness in peacetime. But now, with the Cold War over and defense budgets falling, what will happen to U.S. military forces? Will they revert to a state of unpreparedness or find a new balance? Politicians and military planners alike have found this crucial issue especially difficult to deal with because they have often misunderstood what readiness really means. In this book, security expert Richard Betts surveys problems in developing and measuring combat readiness before, during, and after the Cold War. He analyzes why attempts to maximize it often have counterproductive effects, and how confusions in technical concepts cause political controversy. The book explores conflicts between two objectives that are both vital but work against each other because they compete for resources: operational readiness to fight immediately, and structural readiness—the number of organized units that increase military power, but require time during a crisis to gear up for combat. Betts also discusses the problem brought on by the Cold War and plunging defense budgets: mobilization readiness—the plans and arrangements needed to shorten the time for recreating a large military if it once again becomes necessary. Betts offers new ideas for understanding the dilemmas and tradeoffs that underlie debates on how readiness should be maintained in peacetime, and he explores the strategic consequences of different choices.

The authors explore a more expansive approach to readiness assessments that goes beyond the narrow lens of operational readiness and considers a broader set of dimensions that could affect readiness outcomes.

Readiness is the term used to describe the means by which the Ministry of Defence holds its military forces at varying levels of preparedness to respond to emerging operations. An effective system for assessing and reporting military readiness is a key part of modern armed forces capability, in order to manage risks and address any deficiencies and plan for the future. This has become increasingly important in recent years given the unpredictable nature of the current security environment. This NAO report finds that the MoD has a good system for reporting the readiness of its armed forces, although there is scope for further improvement, both to better define and measure its Public Service Agreement target for readiness, and to manage the main areas of risk, such as logistic support.

Examines the Army's readiness reporting system in light of changes experienced by Army units in the past decade, particularly the ability of units to adapt to emerging requirements by adding and training up new capabilities quickly.

The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) faces short-term and long-term challenges in selecting and recruiting an enlisted force to meet personnel requirements associated with diverse and changing missions. The DoD has established standards for aptitudes/abilities, medical conditions, and physical fitness to be used in selecting recruits who are most likely to succeed in their jobs and complete the first term of service (generally 36 months). In 1999, the Committee on the Youth Population and Military Recruitment was established by the National Research Council (NRC) in response to a request from the DoD. One focus of the committee's work was to examine trends in the youth population relative to the needs of the military and the standards used to screen applicants to meet these needs. When the committee began its work in 1999, the Army, the Navy, and the Air Force had recently experienced recruiting shortfalls. By the early 2000s, all the Services were meeting their goals; however, in the first half of calendar year 2005, both the Army and the Marine Corps experienced recruiting difficulties and, in some months, shortfalls. When recruiting goals are not being met, scientific guidance is needed to inform policy decisions regarding the advisability of lowering standards and the impact of any change on training time and cost, job performance, attrition, and the health of the force. Assessing Fitness for Military Enlistment examines the current physical, medical, and mental health standards for military enlistment in light of (1) trends in the physical condition of the youth population; (2) medical advances for treating certain conditions, as well as knowledge of the typical course of chronic conditions as young people reach adulthood; (3) the role of basic training in physical conditioning; (4) the physical demands and working conditions of various jobs in today's military services; and (5) the measures that are used by the Services to characterize an individual's physical condition. The focus is on the enlistment of 18- to 24-year-olds and their first term of service.