VITAL SIGNS, VIRTUALLY
IN THE PAST, THE COMMAND FIELDED TEAMS THAT TRAVELED TO CONTRACTING OFFICE LOCATIONS TO PERFORM EXTENSIVE REVIEWS AND ASSESSMENTS OF CONTRACT FILES AND PROCESSES. EACH VISIT TOOK 10 BUSINESS DAYS.
one of the ECC’s several PMR innova- tions—an automated tracking CAP.
In the past, the CSB command reviewed findings for concurrence or noncon- currence, and then considered the recommendations for applicability. Each of these was the subject of a narrative response staffed through the command, signed and submitted to the DASA(P) with a CAP. Te DASA(P) then con- sidered the command’s response and accepted it with or without additional comments, whereupon the report became a matter of record and the start- ing point for the next PMR.
Te entire process took months; by the time the cycle was complete in an environ- ment outside the United States, most of the key players had rotated out. With the virtual PMR, ECC reduced the follow-up process to a few weeks by combining the findings,
recommendations, comments
and the PARC corrective actions into one document that incorporated both narrative and logical data points that could be tracked. It worked well for both PMR team members and the PARC staff, who could email the newly created PMR report and CAP back and forth, updating and querying easily.
Because the process is all about managing risk, it is only natural that the summary of findings would take the form of a risk assessment for each of the categories of the PMR, as follows:
Te CAP tracking spreadsheet gives the HCA a snapshot at any given time of the progress the CSB is making in lowering the risk category assigned at the time of the PMR. ECC has taken the process a step further and made CAP progress one of the quarterly reported metrics.
CONCLUSION In the end, by using the virtual model, ECC was able to save the $270,000 budgeted for the three PMRs. Tis was possible because the ACC earlier devel- oped and pushed for the implementation
MR. RANDALL HAMILTON is chief of the Management Assessment Division in Contracting Operations at ECC, Redstone Arsenal, AL. He holds a B.S. in general stud- ies from the University of Kentucky, and a master’s of international management and an MBA from Schiller International Uni- versity. Hamilton is Level III certified in contracting and Level I certified in program management. He is a member of the U.S. Army Acquisition Corps.
Low risk—In normal operations, the organization risks receiving only minor criticism or experiencing only slightly adverse impact
ing operations or customer mission requirements.
Medium risk—Te organization risks moderate criticism or moderately adverse impact to contracting opera- tions or customer mission requirements. Recommendations
will be addressed
and medium risks mitigated within six months of receiving the PMR report, unless
the ECC commander has High
approved a waiver or extension. risk—Te
organization risks
severe criticism or may suffer serious adverse impact to contracting opera- tions or customer mission requirements. Recommendations and high
will be addressed risks mitigated immedi-
ately, unless the ECC commander has approved a waiver or extension.
of PCF. Now ACC is building on this progress by refining the capabilities of the Virtual Contracting Enterprise.
to contract-
If the fiscal picture improves next year, the command hopes to maximize the use of its automation tools and reduce the size of the on-site team. Another option would be to conduct the virtual pro- cess first, then use the results to focus a smaller team for a better look at specific gaps in high-risk processes.
Te success of the virtual PMR is yet another example of how an overarching contracting command structure contin- ues to pay dividends for the U.S. Army.
For more information, contact Daniel Gallagher, director of ECC Contracting Operations, at
daniel.j.gallagher.civ@
mail.mil.
104
Army AL&T Magazine
October–December 2013
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164 |
Page 165 |
Page 166 |
Page 167 |
Page 168 |
Page 169 |
Page 170 |
Page 171 |
Page 172 |
Page 173 |
Page 174 |
Page 175 |
Page 176 |
Page 177 |
Page 178 |
Page 179 |
Page 180 |
Page 181 |
Page 182 |
Page 183 |
Page 184 |
Page 185 |
Page 186 |
Page 187 |
Page 188 |
Page 189 |
Page 190 |
Page 191 |
Page 192 |
Page 193 |
Page 194 |
Page 195 |
Page 196
