The U.S. Army’s new plan to become a leaner, more modern force may actually undercut combat readiness, warns a congressional watchdog.

The Army Transformation Initiative, or ATI, could affect “the availability of Army forces to support Combatant Command requirements and the effectiveness of Army ground operations, as well as the effectiveness of ATI-proposed changes to existing headquarters units,” according to a report by the Congressional Research Service, or CRS, which is Congress’ in-house think tank.

The specifics of ATI have yet to be finalized in the wake of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s April directive that called for transforming the Army “at an accelerated pace by divesting outdated, redundant, and inefficient programs, as well as restructuring headquarters and acquisition systems.”

Hegseth’s directive was quickly followed by a letter to the force from Army Secretary Dan Driscoll and Army Chief of Staff Gen. Randy George, which outlined a plan to convert Infantry Brigade Combat Teams, or IBCTs, to Mobile Brigade Combat Teams “to improve mobility and lethality in a leaner formation.”

The letter also vowed to cancel the procurement of “outdated crewed attack aircraft such as the AH-64D [helicopter], excess ground vehicles like the HMMWV [High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle] and JLTV [Joint Light Tactical Vehicle], and obsolete UAVs [unmanned aerial vehicles] like the Gray Eagle,” as well as canceling programs “that deliver dated, late-to-need, overpriced, or difficult-to-maintain capabilities.”

Army aviation would also take a hit, with Army Reserve helicopter units being inactivated, active-duty combat aviation brigades losing an air cavalry squadron apiece and medevac units having fewer helicopters. However, the Army would field more drones and long-range missiles, the M1E3 tank and the Future Long-Range Assault Helicopter.

CRS questions whether converting IBCTs into Mobile Brigade Combat Teams would affect the Army’s 14 active component IBCTs and 20 National Guard IBCTs “with potential operational impacts in terms of organization and capabilities for Army infantry formations.” Downsizing medevac helicopters “could affect casualty evacuation operations and patient survivability.”

Interestingly, CRS also suggests that the combatant commands may have been frozen out of the ATI process.

“It also is not known if Combatant Commanders played any role in the development of ATI or had the opportunity to express their respective concerns over proposed ATI changes,” the report said.

In particular, reports that the Army may eliminate four of its six Security Force Assistance Brigades, “which primarily support Combatant Commander’s security force assistance efforts,” could have operational implications, the report noted.

Congress has already complained that the Army has yet to provide details and cost savings for ATI. Nor does the Army even have metrics to assess whether ATI is working.

“We need to see your homework,” Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Ala., chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, said in June.

“Without measures of effectiveness and a subsequent evaluation, ATI might be viewed by some as transformation for the sake of transformation,” CRS concluded.