GAO: DoD Failed to Properly Vet Global PCS Moves Contractor
According to the Government Accountability Office, U.S. TRANSCOM is responsible for approximately 300,000 personal property shipments for military members and families each year. It costs the DoD approximately $2 billion a year to carry out these relocations which are part of the permanent change of station process.
But the PCS process for military families trying to move since 2021 has been marred by problems associated with a failed DoD attempt to select a single, global contractor for military PCS moves.
According to the federal government, “As a result of dissatisfaction with its relocation program, TRANSCOM awarded the Global Household Goods Contract, worth up to $17.9 billion over approximately 9 years, to a single commercial move manager in November 2021.”
But, as the GAO official site notes, the DOD terminated the contract in June 2025 “due to the contractor’s failure to perform services specified in the terms and conditions of the contract.”
A Government Accountability Office Report
On September 11, 2025, the federal Government Accountability Office (GAO) published a report titled, DOD Needs Better Information to Effectively Oversee Relocation Program Reforms.
This report indicates the Department of Defense’s failed $17 billion house hold goods reform project failed in part because the DoD and U.S. Transcom did not gather “comprehensive information” about the contractor it hired to do the job, HomeSafe Alliance, which ultimately led to the Department of Defense approving a $17.9 billion contract with HomeSafeAlliance the company was ultimately ill-equipped to handle, according to the GAO.
The GAO report says United States Transportation Command (the military command that oversees military household goods shipments at home and overseas) “…did not have sufficient, comprehensive information about GHC (1) capacity, (2) performance, and (3) costs to effectively manage risks and oversee contract implementation.”
While it’s true that U.S. TRANSCOM officials “identified capacity constraints as a risk” before the contract began, TRANSCOM “had only limited information on the contractor’s capacity and could not verify that information.”
This is the point at which some ask where the Department of Governmental Efficiency was at any stage in this process and why that department didn’t step in to help when it was established in 2024. Those answers are not forthcoming from the federal government at press time,
The GAO report also notes:
- DOD failed to obtain “comprehensive feedback on service members’ experiences” with the new contractor, “limiting its assessment of contractor performance. Respondents to a GAO survey of service members and spouses reported inadequate communication with the contractor’s customer service representatives about the status of their shipments and delays in multiple phases of the moving process.”
- TRANSCOM failed to obtain “complete information regarding costs associated with the GHC transition; DOD incurred unplanned transition costs, paid management fees for task orders ultimately not carried out by the contractor, and lacked clarity” on how costs for the new program compared to existing program costs.
What’s Next?
What happens now? MilitaryOneSource, an official federal government site for military members and families, notes “All personal property shipments will be scheduled and/or rebooked under the legacy Tender of Service program.” There is no substantive information at press time about a possible replacement for HomeSafeAlliance or how the DoD will handle PCS moves in a more permanent way.
For questions about your current or future PCS move, contact your local household goods/transportation office.
Frequently Asked Questions
What was the subject of the recent Government Accountability Office report?
The report detailed problems with a contract from the Department of Defense. This agreement was known as the Global Household Goods Contract.
What was the purpose of this contract?
The contract was meant to reform the process for moving the property of service members.
What is the current status of the contract?
In June 2025, the Department of Defense terminated the contract.
Why did the department terminate the agreement?
The contractor, a company called HomeSafe Alliance, had failed to meet the terms and conditions set forth in the agreement.
How much money had been spent on the contract?
The termination occurred after the department had already spent funds in excess of $100 million.
When was the contract awarded?
The department awarded the contract to HomeSafe Alliance in November 2021.
What was the potential value of the contract?
The contract’s value across its potential lifespan had an estimated value of up to $17.9 billion.
What program was the contract intended to reform?
Its goal was a reform of the Defense Personal Property Program.
Why did this program need reform?
For many years, service members and their families had reported deep dissatisfaction with the relocation process. They cited persistent problems, including delays, property damage, and poor communication.
How was this contract supposed to solve these problems?
The contract was designed to streamline the system, improve service quality, and provide accountability. The plan involved assigning approximately 300,000 moves per year to one company.
What central issue did the GAO report identify?
The report identified a lack of sufficient oversight by the department’s Transportation Command, also known as TRANSCOM. This lapse was a core problem.
What was the consequence of this lack of oversight?
The failure in oversight was a direct contributor to the contract’s collapse. It also perpetuated the difficulties that military families have faced for years.
Were there early indications of trouble?
The GAO report confirms that officials at TRANSCOM knew about potential capacity issues with the contractor before the implementation phase began.
How did TRANSCOM proceed with this knowledge?
Despite identifying these capacity limits as a risk of consequence, the command proceeded. It did so without a verified understanding of the contractor’s ability to manage the huge volume of moves.
What happened when the contract rollout began?
The rollout started with a small number of shipments in April 2024. The contractor’s limitations in capacity became obvious in a short time.
How did the contractor’s performance falter?
As the quantity of shipments and the scope of the work increased, the contractor struggled to maintain the required pace. This led to logistical failures, including missed property pickups and delayed deliveries.
Did TRANSCOM have enough data to manage the contract?
The GAO investigation found a systemic lack of information at TRANSCOM. The command did not possess comprehensive data on the contractor’s performance.
How did this information gap affect oversight?
Without enough data, TRANSCOM could not grasp the true extent of the problems. It could not assess the contractor’s work with effect or enforce accountability.
What did service members report about the new system?
A survey conducted by the GAO showed that users were not satisfied. Respondents reported that communication from the contractor’s representatives was insufficient. They also described a frustrating lack of transparency about the status of their shipments.
Were there also issues with financial management?
Yes, the GAO report raised questions about the contract’s financial oversight. It found that TRANSCOM lacked a complete view of the costs associated with the transition.
What kind of financial problems occurred?
The department incurred unplanned expenses during the changeover. It also paid management fees for services that the contractor did not end up providing. A clear cost comparison to the old system became impossible to determine.
What was the impact of the contract’s failure on military families?
The collapse of the contract had a profound impact. Families were again forced to contend with the stress and uncertainty of a system with deep flaws.
What is the main recommendation from the GAO report?
The report’s primary recommendation is for the department to obtain comprehensive information on contractor capacity, performance, and costs. This information is needed to effectively oversee programs and inform all future decisions.
Has the department agreed with this recommendation?
Yes, the Department of Defense has concurred with the recommendation from the GAO. The challenge of implementation remains.
About the author
Editor-in-Chief Joe Wallace is a 13-year veteran of the United States Air Force and a former reporter/editor for Air Force Television News and the Pentagon Channel. His freelance work includes contract work for Motorola, VALoans.com, and Credit Karma. He is co-founder of Dim Art House in Springfield, Illinois, and spends his non-writing time as an abstract painter, independent publisher, and occasional filmmaker.
