Army Sustainment VOLUME 46, ISSUE 5 | Page 31

senting the requiring activity and the contracting officer, providing contract oversight, and influencing the contractor to meet the terms and conditions of the contract. Observations, Insights, and Lessons The Combined Arms Support Command (CASCOM) Acquisition, Logistics, Technology–Integration Office collects observations, insights, and lessons (OILs) from many sources. Collection sources include CASCOM’s command post exercise– functional, Division West culminating training events, CASCOM Reverse Collection and Analysis Team (R– CAAT) forums, OCS surveys, key leader interviews, after action reviews, and news articles. OCS OILs are analyzed, shared, and integrated across the DOD OCS community of interest. The following are some of the key OILs regarding CORs with specific emphasis on doctrine and policy, organization, training, materiel, and leadership and education. Doctrine and Policy The DOD and Department of the Army (DA) published several orders, directives, and guidelines re- garding COR selection and training, beginning in 2009. The guidance helped to shape the predeployment COR selection and training process. The guidance also helped influence requiring activities to meet COR assignment challenges and correct shortfalls from the early phases of Operations Iraqi and Enduring Freedom. In addition to DOD and DA COR guidance, the Forces Command published COR training and certification guidelines in its predeployment training message. The message provided great insight and guidelines regarding COR training; however, a key observation noted that the message was not effectively distributed to operational commands. During R– CAAT forums, many commanders indicated they were unaware of the Forces Command’s predeployment training messages. Organization CORs are normally additional duty assignments. However, in many cases, because of the complexity and magnitude of a contract, CORs may be required to execute COR duties full time. During several R–CAAT inter- views conducted between 2011 and 2013 with unit commanders and their staffs, leaders indicated that, given their assigned operational missions and loads, they were not fully prepared to resource full-time COR requirements with organic personnel. Unit leaders must acknowledge and embrace contract oversight responsibilities early on during the predeployment process and carefully plan to use organic resources to provide appropriate contract oversight. Institutional Training The Army Logistics University and the Defense Acquisition University are primarily responsible for providing COR training and certification through various resident, online, and mobile team training venues. The COR may enroll and attend courses offered by the Army Logistics University and the Defense Acquisition University. The courses are tailored to the complexity and magnitude of the performance work statement or contract. Based on mission analysis and contract oversight requirements, requiring activity leaders determine the level of training CORs will attend. From a COR adherence to the provisions of the performance work statement (PWS). However, the guidance outlined in the PWS did not always meet the real-time requirements. As a result, the commander on the ground had to make decisions and give guidance beyond what was spelled out in the PWS. Letter of Technical Direction Using a letter of technical direction (LOTD), a COR can address issues on the ground and make minor changes that are within the scope of the PWS or contract without violating the contractual agreements. The LOTD process gave us (the other CORs in my unit and me) the capability to make expedient administrative changes without accruing additional contract-related costs. The LOTDs were vetted with the contracting officer or administrative contracting officer (ACO) and contractor. The contracting officer or ACO had to approve each LOTD prior to implementation. These ad- ministrative changes allowed us to modify the PWS quickly to fit the situation on the ground. Corrective Action Request CORs can use the corrective action request (CAR) process to influence contractor performance. A CAR is a formal request for a plan of action to correct deficient contractor performance based on the performance standards in the PWS. Continued on page 30 SEPTEMBER–OCTOBER 2014 29