全球智库信息集成服务系统

Garrison problems generally reflected those at the army level.

• In the garrison-level survey analysis, prioritized problem areas chosen by soldiers at a local level reflected the earlier Army-level analysis: military practices and culture, soldier's well-being, and work-life balance.
• Focus groups also highlighted health care system and childcare problems.

Garrison findings reflected variability in types of help needed.

• The specific types of needs reported by soldiers varied among garrisons — but activities, information, and help provided by an actual person were most commonly reported.

Soldiers at different garrisons often sought help in different ways.

• Fewer than 20 percent of respondents at any garrison reported that their needs were unmet.
• Focus groups highlighted military resources that are particularly helpful, including chaplains and Army Community Service.

Some tension exists between a desire for resilience and a desire to seek help.

• Soldiers at all levels reported in focus groups that they wanted to — or should — be able to solve their problems themselves without needing to bring leadership into the equation.
• Focus groups revealed that individuals often do not realize that they need assistance until their challenges have become much more difficult to address.

Soldiers use a variety of methods to find out about resources to solve their problems, but barriers to resources were still a challenge.

• The internet and word of mouth were the most common modes of finding out information.
• Focus groups revealed that lack of knowledge, lack of experience with resources, and limited hours of operation were commonly perceived barriers to resources.

The RAND Arroyo Center conducted a 2014 formal needs assessment survey of active component soldiers at 40 installations. The original study described a broad landscape of needs in such areas as quality of life support services provided to help families cope with a variety of challenges. In this report, new analysis of those survey data explores differences at the garrison level and includes additional focus group data. The analysis suggests that resources providing one-on-one, personalized help should be given priority and it is possible that emphasizing trust between soldiers and their leaders could help fulfill this need. Providing easily accessible information online and staffing services that provide information to soldiers and their families should also be continuing priorities. In intergovernmental support agreements and other community partnership activities, Army garrisons should consider focusing more on partnerships that help meet the needs of soldiers and their families. The Army might consider a series of solutions to achieve the right balance between fostering resilience and helping its soldiers solve problems early. One solution is to expose noncommissioned officers and other soldiers earlier and more frequently in their careers to information regarding what resources are available. Another solution is to set priorities at the aggregate Army level, rather than leaving lower levels to determine how to prioritize the many requirements that are passed down. Finally, the Army should consider strengthening the "no wrong door" policy at Army Community Service and broadening the policy to help soldiers and families navigate resources.

• Chapter One

  Introduction

• Chapter Two

  Mixed-Methods Approach

• Chapter Three

  Results

• Chapter Four

  Summary Findings and Recommendations

• Appendix

  Soldier Self-Management of Problems Focus Group Protocol