By: Alexander Hardy, Erin Eckman, and Ben Hazen
Abstract
In-Transit Visibility (ITV) is a critical enabler of the DoD’s ability to project power, sustain forces, and respond to crises. When implemented effectively, ITV provides commanders and logisticians with timely and reliable insights into where assets are, how they are moving, and where risk is building. When visibility is incomplete or unreliable, decisions default to assumptions rather than data, increasing operational risk and degrading readiness.
Although DoD policy establishes ITV as an enterprise-wide requirement, persistent structural gaps limit its effectiveness in day-to-day operations. This article reviews the policy framework governing ITV, examines the structural barriers that prevent consistent end-to-end visibility, and synthesizes findings from Government Accountability Office (GAO) audits that document long-standing challenges in interoperability, governance, and data reliability.
The analysis highlights that many ITV shortfalls stem from fragmented systems, inconsistent data standards, limited enterprise integration, and uneven user proficiency. These factors constrain the DoD’s ability to translate ITV policy goals into actionable decision-making processes across the Defense Transportation System (DTS). Finally, the article outlines practical future directions such as strengthening ITV as an operational capability, emphasizing investment in common data interfaces, user-centered training, and closer integration with commercial partners. The goal is to help convert ITV policy and oversight into concrete improvements that strengthen mobility, reduce uncertainty, and enhance readiness across the joint logistics enterprise.
Digital aviation interface image courtesy of Shutterstock (Photo contributor Erik Svoboda)
Introduction
The DoD’s ability to project power and respond to crises depends not only on moving forces and material, but on knowing where those assets are during their lifecycle. ITV is central to how the DoD develops, integrates, employs, and sustains military power. It gives commanders and logisticians a current picture of where assets are, how they are moving, and where there is inherent risk in the distribution network. When visibility is incomplete or unreliable, cargo cannot be reprioritized with confidence; commanders lose a common operating picture, and decisions fall back on assumptions instead of data.
Staff Sgt. Jeremy Ethier, 104th Logistics Readiness Squadron Traffic Management Office cargo technician, unpacks newly
arrived cargo, February 1, 2024, at Barnes Air National Guard Base, MA. (U.S. Air National Guard photo by Tech. Sgt. Sara Kolinski)
DoD policy recognizes ITV as a mission-critical enterprise capability, yet persistent gaps still limit its value to day-to-day operations. This article reviews the policy foundations of ITV, highlights the structural barriers that keep the capability from working as intended, and outlines practical directions for improving ITV as a dynamic capability.[1]
DoD Policy Requirements
DoD policy establishes ITV as a required enterprise-wide capability and assigns responsibility for managing it across the department. Rather than leaving visibility to individual components or programs, policy treats ITV as a formal requirement tied to the movement of personnel and materiel through the DTS. USTRANSCOM is the lead organization responsible for ITV and related tracking technologies for cargo and personnel moving within the DTS.[2] This designation establishes clear ownership for ITV and signals that visibility be centrally coordinated rather than built separately by individual services or units. Transportation policy further embeds ITV within the DTS by identifying it as a required element of DoD transportation and traffic management.[3] In practice, this means ITV is part of the DoD’s formal transportation framework, not just a standalone or discretionary capability.
DoD policy also prescribes ITV responsibilities across specific functional areas. Medical logistics policy requires theater-level organizations to maintain visibility of medical materiel in transit,[4] while supply chain policy directs components to track logistics performance metrics and use automated identification and tracking technologies.[5] In addition, logistics policy assigns the Defense Logistics Agency responsibility for improving data transparency across requirements, inventory, and shipments.[6] Together, these policies establish who is responsible for ITV, where it applies, and how it should be used across missions and modes.
U.S. and Peruvian Airmen assigned to the Combined Joint Task Force, Resolute Sentinel 23, help load medical supplies at Base Aérea Las Palmas to be used by personnel at Hospital Dos De Mayo, Lima, Peru, July 5, 2023, during exercise Resolute Sentinel 23. (U.S. Air Force photo by Master Sgt. Corban Lundborg)
What are the Desired ITV Capabilities?
If these policy requirements were fully implemented, ITV capabilities would function as a decision-support capability rather than a collection of disconnected tracking systems. The value of ITV is defined not only by the existence of data, but by whether that data enables timely, informed decisions about material development, acquisition, integration, employment, and sustainment.
US National Space Defense Center support Bilateral Exercise Keen Edge 24 at Schriever Space Force Base in February 2024, testing command and control operability in a contingent environment. (U.S. Space Force photo by Tiana Williams)
Effective ITV provides end-to-end visibility of assets as they move from acquisition to military integration to employment destination, including transitions between organizations, transportation modes, and geographic regions. Visibility should persist throughout movement, rather than degrade as shipments pass between systems or stakeholders. The information provided must be timely, accurate, and reliable enough to support tactical, operational, and strategic decisions. When logistics data are delayed, incomplete, or inconsistent, users lose trust in the usefulness of ITV.
Effective ITV should also support how leaders prioritize and allocate material. High-risk or mission-critical items, like medical supplies or components for nuclear weapons systems, should be easy to identify and monitor more closely without creating separate or manual tracking processes. ITV should also help inform a clear operational picture. Commanders and logisticians should be able to understand asset movement without logging into multiple disconnected platforms or reconciling conflicting data sources on their own.
In addition to facilitating real-time tracking, historical ITV data can be used to improve estimates of how long movements take in austere, contested, and military-unique distribution channels. More accurate travel time estimates give planners a better basis for routing cargo, anticipating last-mile challenges, and setting realistic expectations for delivery in places such as mountainous, littoral, or desert environments. Finally, ITV should enable performance measurement and accountability by allowing leaders to assess delivery timelines, identify disruptions, and pinpoint where systemic delays occur. Taken together, these expectations describe what effective ITV should look like in practice, regardless of what specific systems or technologies might enable it.
Current Challenges
Despite clear policy directions, existing ITV systems often fall short of delivering desired capabilities due to persistent structural barriers that limit integration, data reliability, and usability at scale.
USAF mission system operator tests agile communication platform onboard KC-46 Pegasus at Andersen Air Force Base, Guam in July 2025 during Air Force’s 2025 Department-Level Exercise allowing secured communication within a contested environment. (U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sgt. Dalton Williams)
First, ITV remains fragmented across systems and organizations. DoD personnel rely on logistics and transportation systems developed and managed by the services and their contractors. These systems often use different data standards and interfaces, creating visibility gaps as assets move across areas of responsibility. As a result, logistics data are often collected and reported to support important but siloed decisions rather than presented as a single, common operation picture.
Second, data quality can be compromised at many points in the ITV chain, from sensors and communication capabilities to data storage and analytic tools. Visibility depends on accurate, timely, data entry across the supply chain, but inconsistent processes, human error, and uneven participation by transportation providers can produce incomplete or outdated information.[7] When users cannot rely on the accuracy of shipment data, ITV becomes less useful for planning and execution.
Third, existing technologies do not always perform reliably in operational environments. Tracking systems that depend on radiofrequency identification or satellite links require connectivity and infrastructure that may be limited or degraded in austere or contested locations. Previous operational testing has shown that technical limitations, combined with unclear tactics and procedures for system use, can hinder effective data collection and utilization.
Fourth, DoD lacks a consistently implemented enterprise-wide asset tracking capability. While USTRANSCOM is designated as the lead proponent for ITV, components continue to pursue individual solutions, which limit coordination and communicated awareness across the DoD.
Finally, resource and workforce constraints complicate implementation. Sustaining effective ITV requires continued investment in technology, integration, and training. Competing priorities and uneven user proficiency further limit the DoD’s ability to fully leverage existing capabilities.
Together, these challenges explain why ITV policy intent has not yet been translated into consistent, department-wide visibility.
GAO Suggestions
The GAO consistently reports that the DoD struggles to translate its ITV policy goals into reliable, enterprise-wide capabilities. These audits repeatedly identify structural and implementation gaps that limit the effectiveness of ITV across the DoD and help explain why field users still encounter inconsistent visibility capabilities.
A recurring GAO finding is the absence of a comprehensive, department-wide strategy for asset and ITV. Without a unified framework, visibility efforts have evolved unevenly, resulting in fragmented implementation rather than a coherent enterprise capability. This often appears as different commands using different tools and business rules to track similar movements.[8] [9] [10]
GAO also highlights weaknesses in governance, performance metrics, and oversight mechanisms used to assess ITV initiatives. In multiple reviews, GAO found that DoD lacked clear measures to evaluate progress and integrated accountability structures to drive improvement, which limits leadership’s ability to judge whether visibility efforts are delivering decision-relevant outcomes. This can mean dashboards that track what is easy to measure rather than what planners and commanders need to see most.[11] [12]
Another persistent concern is interoperability. GAO has reported that logistics and transportation systems often remain insufficiently integrated, creating visibility gaps as assets move across services, transportation modes, and operational contexts. For those trying to track cargo end-to-end, this can mean switching between systems and manually reconciling conflicting status information.[13] [14] Finally, GAO has documented continued shortfalls in end-to-end and last-mile visibility in deployed environments, where inconsistent application of tracking technologies and fragmented data systems reduce oversight of asset delivery and receipt.[15]
Taken together, these findings suggest that effective ITV will require sustained investment, integration across services and logistics systems, and coordinated oversight, rather than isolated improvements to individual applications.
Members of JB Charleston SparkTank hosted Sandbox AQ at Joint Base Charleston, SC in July 2023 during Exercise Mobility Guardian 2023 to find alternative to GPS within contested environments. (U.S Air Force photo by Airman 1st Class Carl Good)
Future Directions
Future improvements in the DoD’s ITV enterprise aim to create a more integrated, predictive, and user-centered logistics environment. A primary focus is linking multiple legacy and emerging systems to present a unified, near real-time view of asset movement across commands, modes, and partners. Achieving this will require common data standards and secure data-exchange mechanisms that reduce blind spots between systems.
Advances in technology will also drive the next phase of capability. Real-time location systems, GPS-enabled sensors, and analytics tools are being evaluated and fielded to improve shipment accuracy, refine predictive insights, and support proactive decisions about routing and prioritization.
Equally important is continued investment in personnel proficiency. Effective ITV depends on users who can interpret data, manage exceptions, and adapt tools to mission needs. Targeted, task-based training can help ensure personnel can sustain and troubleshoot these systems in realistic operational contexts. Finally, closer collaboration with the commercial partners will strengthen the overall network. By incorporating private-sector tracking technologies, data-sharing methods, and supply chain practices into requirements and contracts, the DoD can accelerate technology adoption and enhance the resilience and responsiveness of the joint transportation system.
Conclusion
ITV remains a foundational enabler of effective logistics operations. When implemented well, it allows logisticians and commanders to monitor asset movement, anticipate risk, and adjust plans as missions and conditions evolve. When visibility falls short, even well-resourced logistics networks become vulnerable to delay, misallocation, and degraded readiness. DoD policy clearly establishes ITV as an enterprise-level responsibility, and years of oversight have reinforced the need for integrated, end-to-end visibility capabilities. However, persistent gaps in interoperability, data reliability, and system usability continue to limit the practical value of ITV in the field. These shortcomings directly affect how teams plan routes, prioritize shipments, and communicate status to commanders.
The next phase of progress will depend on applying mature, field-tested technologies to everyday logistics operations. GPS-enabled tracking, modular data interfaces, and predictive analytics are already available at high technology readiness levels and can be integrated into existing workflows. When paired with consistent data standards and user-focused training, these tools can reduce manual reconciliation, improve trust in logistics data, and help close visibility gaps across commands and carriers. Moving forward, improving ITV depends on sustained advocacy for enterprise integration, investment in operator proficiency, and alignment with both internal and commercial partners whose supply-chain practices already reflect these principles. Converting policy intent into operational capability can strengthen mobility, reduce uncertainty, and enhance readiness across the joint logistics enterprise delivering reliable, actionable support to Warfighters.
The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Air Force, the Department of War, or the US Government.
About the Authors
Alexander Hardy is co-founder and Chief Executive Officer of Valerio Solutions. He previously worked in product development, system architecture, and partner management for Fortune 500 companies. He serves in the US Army (USA) Reserve as a Non-Commissioned Officer in Charge (NCOIC) and has completed military education at the USA Infantry School (now Maneuver Center of Excellence) and the USA Intelligence Center of Excellence. He is an Adjunct Professor of Information Systems at the University of Dayton School of Business and earned a Master of Science in Information Systems from Northwestern University and a Bachelor of Arts in History and Political Science from Loyola University Chicago. He is currently pursuing a Master of Business Administration at The Ohio State University’s Fisher College of Business.
Erin Eckman is completing a Master of Public Administration from Ohio State University where she also received a Bachelor of Science in Public Policy Analysis and Economics. She is a policy research analyst for Valerio Solutions where she focuses on national security, economic, and workforce development policy. She previously supported workforce development initiatives for the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory, conducted economic research for the Bipartisan Policy Center, and contributed to workforce development efforts supporting the AUKUS submarine program with Serco.
Ben Hazen, PhD, Maj (Ret), USAF, enlisted as a satellite, wideband, and telemetry systems technician where he worked in combat communications. After serving as NCOIC of the rocket research laboratory in the Astronautics Department at the USAF Academy, he earned a commission as an aircraft maintenance officer, where he worked on cargo and refueling aircraft. He currently leads research in areas of supply chain management technology, and innovation as Chief Innovation Officer at Valerio Solutions. He has served as an editor at several peer-reviewed academic journals, to include serving as founding co-editor-in-chief (emeritus) of Journal of Defense Analytics and Logistics, former editor-in-chief of International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics, and senior editor at Journal of Business Logistics.
Works Cited
[1] Loska, D., Hazen, B., Rich, N., Genchev, S., & Malik, T. (2025). Military Supply Chain Logistics and Dynamic Capabilities: A Literature Review and Synthesis. Transportation Journal, 64(2). https://doi.org/10.1002/tjo3.70002
[2] Department of Defense. (2020, April 7). Joint deployment and distribution enterprise (JDDE) planning and operations (DoDI 5158.06). https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/issuances/dodi/515806p.pdf
[3] Department of Defense. (2022, October 21). Transportation and traffic management (DoDD 4500.09). https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/issuances/dodd/450009p.pdf
[4] Department of Defense. (2023a, September 29). DoD medical materiel management (DoDI 5101.15). https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/issuances/dodi/510115p.pdf
[5] Department of Defense. (2023b, November 7). DoD supply chain materiel management procedures: Make and maintain materiel (DoDM 4140.01, Vol. 4). https://www.google.com/search?q=https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/issuances/dodm/414001_vol4.PDF
[6] Department of Defense. (2017, June 29). Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) (DoDD 5105.22). https://www.esd.whs.mil/portals/54/documents/dd/issuances/dodd/510522p.pdf
[7] Hazen, B. T., Boone, C. A., Ezell, J. D., & Jones-Farmer, L. A. (2014). Data quality for data science, predictive analytics, and big data in supply chain management: An introduction to the problem and suggestions for research and applications. International Journal of Production Economics, 154(1), 72–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2014.04.018
[8] U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2004, September). Military logistics: DOD needs to take additional actions to address challenges in supply chain management (GAO-05-15). https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-05-15.pdf
[9] U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2013, February 28). Defense logistics: A completed comprehensive strategy is needed to guide DOD’s in-transit visibility efforts (GAO-13-201). https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-13-201.pdf
[10] U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2015, December 22). Defense logistics: DOD has addressed most reporting requirements and continues to refine its asset visibility strategy (GAO-16-88). https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-16-88.pdf
[11] U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2017, March 16). Defense logistics: Improved performance measures and information needed for assessing asset visibility initiatives (GAO-17-183). https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-17-183.pdf
[12] U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2011a, July). Defense logistics: DOD needs to take additional actions to address challenges in supply chain management (GAO-11-569). https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-11-569.pdf
[13] U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2005, September 12). Defense logistics: Better strategic planning can help ensure DOD’s successful implementation of passive radio frequency identification (GAO-05-345). https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-05-345.pdf
[14] U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2007, June 29). Defense logistics: Efforts to improve distribution and supply support for joint military operations could benefit from a coordinated management approach (GAO-07-807). https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-07-807.pdf
[15] U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2011b, October 7). Warfighter support: DOD has made progress, but supply and distribution challenges remain in Afghanistan (GAO-12-138). https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-12-138.pdf