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 re- organization – 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