COR TASK GROUP

1. COR TASK GROUP FINDINGS ALTERNATIVE STRATEGIES RECOMMENDATIONS

2. 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

3. 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

4. FINDINGS • Current Situation – Continued • Heavy reliance on COR designation by position • Will require an estimated $10mm investment in training to meet current agency standards

5. ALTERNATIVES • Alternative I – Minimal Change • Maintains the current system, but requires all personnel with COR duties meet current and future certification requirements

6. 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 ALTERNATIVE I

7. 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

8. 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 ALTERNATIVE II

9. ALTERNATIVES • Alternative III – Modified Retardant Template • Identical to Alternative II, except the GA ACO is eliminated from responsibilities

10. 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 ALTERNATIVE III

11. 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)

12. 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 ALTERNATIVE IV

13. ALTERNATIVES • Alternative V – the ICS Alternative • Follows the ICS Model and places National contracts under ICS areas of functional responsibility • Operations • Logistics • Finance

14. 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 ALTERNATIVE V

15. 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

16. 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

17. 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

18. 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

19. 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

20. RECOMMENDATION • Alternative V – The ICS Alternative • However, adoption of any of the alternatives, except alternative I, will be successful if properly staffed and managed.

21. 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

22. 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.

23. 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