A review of the Army's troop schools found that the internal control weaknesses in the program first reported over 10 years ago still existed. Expenditures were not justified. Most justifications reviewed were not based on assessed performance deficiencies of individual soldiers, as required, and none documented that troop schools were the most cost-effective alternative. The Army was not exercising adequate control over troop school operations. For example, the Army had continued to offer many courses without proper authorization, wasted money by paying for unneeded course offerings, and allowed contractors to administer tests to determine whether soldiers need training, despite the potential for creating false demand. The persistent nature of troop school management problems clearly indicated that the Army had not followed up on the corrective actions it initiated in response to findings and recommendations of the earlier study. Actions taken by the Army in 1990 to assign program monitoring responsibilities and to call top management's attention to material control weaknesses through the Secretary of the Army's Annual Statement on Internal Control were significant steps in the right direction. However, the Army did not follow through on these initial steps. Monitoring and follow-up were needed to ensure that corrective actions were properly implemented and that problems were resolved. (Appendixes include comments from the Department of Defense.) (YLB)