COR TASK GROUP
FINDINGS
ALTERNATIVE STRATEGIES
RECOMMENDATIONS
TASK GROUP DELIVERABLES
 Describe the current situation
 Develop alternative strategies to
implement an effective COR program
 Develop a risk analysis for each
alternative strategy
 Describe program management roles
and responsibilities
FINDINGS
 The current situation is organizationally
inconsistent, with the following general
characteristics:
– Lacks dedicated program managers
– Forces National CO’s into dual roles
– Heavy reliance on a multi-agency
seasonal workforce that may not
meet current standards
FINDINGS
 Current Situation – Continued
– Heavy reliance on COR designation
by position
– Will require an estimated $10mm
investment in training to meet current
agency standards
ALTERNATIVES
 Alternative I – Minimal Change
– Maintains the current system, but
requires all personnel with COR
duties meet current and future
certification requirements
ALTERNATIVE I
 Pros
– None
 Cons
– Reduces capacity
– Requires significant
$
– Retains dual role for
CO’s
– Relies on seasonal
wkfc.
– Inefficient use of
CORs
– Requires greatest #
of CORs
ALTERNATIVES
 Alternative II – National Retardant
Template
– Adds program managers
– Adds significant duties for the ACOs
– Provides for designated CORs (by
ACOs) for each National Contract
ALTERNATIVE II
 Pros
– National consistency
– Improved oversight
– Consistency at GA
from ACOs
– Provides Pgm mgmt
– Decreases # of
CORs
– Meets all
requirements
 Cons
– Increased workload
for ACOs
– May require
additional staffing
(Pgm Mgrs)
– Some additional
training required for
Pgm Mgrs to
become CORs
ALTERNATIVES
 Alternative III – Modified Retardant
Template
– Identical to Alternative II, except the
GA ACO is eliminated from
responsibilities
ALTERNATIVE III
 Pros
–
–
–
–
National consistency
Improved oversight
Provides Pgm mgmt
Decreases # of
CORs
– Meets all
requirements
– Decreased workload
for ACOs
 Cons
– May require
additional staffing
– Additional training
required for Pgm
Mgrs to become
CORs
– Less efficient
feedback mechanism
– Increased workload
for some NCOs
ALTERNATIVES
 Alternative IV – the 2 Model Alternative
– Maintains the current aviation model
for aviation resources, and adds a
services model for all others
– Only real difference between the two
is the role of the GA ACOs (retain
current responsibilities)
ALTERNATIVE IV
 Pros
– Retains current
aviation model
– Least change alt.
– Doesn’t affect ACO
workload
– Improved oversight
– Provides Pgm mgmt
– Decreases # of
CORs
– Meets all
requirements
 Cons
– Additional training
required for Pg. Mgrs
to become CORs
– Nationally
inconsistent
organization
ALTERNATIVES
 Alternative V – the ICS Alternative
– Follows the ICS Model and places
National contracts under ICS areas of
functional responsibility
Operations
Logistics
Finance
ALTERNATIVE V
 Pros
– Places each contract
under correct
functional area
– Fewest # of Pgm
Mgrs
– National consistency
– Improved oversight
– Decreases # of
CORs
– Meets all
requirements
 Cons
– Requires some reorganization –
Nationally and
Geographically
– Additional training
required for Pgm
Mgrs to become
CORs
ALTERNATIVES
 Elements common to all Alternatives (except
Alt. I)
– Program Manager
– One stop shopping
– Lead COR (Pgm Mgr) coordinates all other
program CORs
– Provides technical expertise
– Provides a qualified cadre of CORs
– Eliminates COR designation by position
– Eliminates COTR position
ALTERNATIVE RISK ANALYSIS
 Risks of no change:
– Increasing costs of
training/certification/maintaining currency
of CORs
– Reduction in capacity (non-federal
personnel)
– Inadequate oversight
– Continued dual responsibility for NCOs
– Increasing numbers of claims
– Government being placed at risk
ALTERNATIVE RISK ANALYSIS
 Adoption of recommended alternative will:
– Reduce costs for certification/training
– Increase payment accuracy/timeliness
– Reduce claims
– Reduce congressional inquiries
– Comply with agency policy
– Redistribute the workload
– Protect our financial interests and public
trust
ALTERNATIVE COSTS
 Costs of maintaining status quo:
– Estimated at $10mm every 2 years
– Long term, these will increase
– Ineffective use of the workforce
– May not be receiving the goods and
services being paid for
– We cannot afford improperly
administered contracts
ALTERNATIVE COSTS
 Costs of Change:
– Properly trained and qualified COR
workforce is more cost effective
– Costs will include:
Training of PI’s, and Program Leaders
Re-organization/staffing costs
– Result: more effective and efficient
organization
RECOMMENDATION
 Alternative V – The ICS Alternative
– However, adoption of any of the
alternatives, except alternative I, will
be successful if properly staffed and
managed.
IMPLEMENTATION
 Key items that need to be addressed:
– The number of CORs/contract in each GA
– ID the ICS positions with PI responsibilities
– Develop Implementation Plan that includes
a workload analysis
– Review and amend training curriculum to
reflect changing responsibilities
– Develop and implement a review process
to ensure desired results are achieved
CURRENT STATUS
 Director’s March memo:
– Implement a hybrid of Alt II and III
– Implementation to begin in FY 2008
– Implementation tasks include:
ID available training and determine need
for additional non-aviation COR training
Analyze contracts/programs to
determine the role of ACOs.
CURRENT STATUS - CONTINUED
– Implementation Tasks – continued
Analyze current contracts and
determine COR needs
–Number
–Location
ID Program Managers
Develop a process for COR
certification for National Contracts