assignment
Need help with assignment
Operational contract support (OCS) is important to unit and Army mission success.
If applied carefully, OCS can be an important force multiplier and enhancing operational responsiveness for unit operations and the Department of Defense. OCS can also supplement high-demand, low density organic support force capabilities or provide capabilities that do not exist in the military structure. OCS allows prioritization of military units for combat power and higher priority missions and reduce operational tempo for support forces. A typical example in theater for the use of contract support is reception, staging, onward movement, and integration (RSOI) activities (Department of Defense, 2019).
Sergeants major (SGMs) must know OCS is the process of planning for and obtaining supplies, services, and construction from commercial sources in support of operations. SGMs must understand OCS is a complex source of support planned and executed with the Joint Force or Combatant Commander’s guidance through the contracting authority of military department or Department of Defense agencies. SGMs, among others, need to advise commanders about OCS activities to provide effective and legal support to Soldiers. This begins with whether the commander’s unit is a requiring activity, a supported activity, or both. A requiring activity identifies, plans, and coordinates OCS while a supported unit receives support. A unit can be both if it initiates the request for support (Department of Defense, 2016).
SGMs have to ensure the commander does not step in several potholes of OCS. This includes unauthorized commitment and understanding command authority does not equal contracting authority. An unauthorized commitment is an agreement that is not legally binding because the government representative lacks the authority to enter that agreement on behalf of the government. Only contracting officers can enter contractual actions or modifications. Military or civil service members can be financially liable for unauthorized commitments. Command authority is the legal authority of the military commander to organize and employ assigned and attached forces. Command authority does not include the authority to enter in binding contracts for the United States government. The legally binding contracts express the specific terms and conditions contractors adhere to complete their contract (Department of Defense, 2016). Commanders need advice to stay out of the many potholes of OCS.
References
Department of Defense. (2016). Multi-Service Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures for Operational Contract Support (ATP 4-10). Retrieved from https://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_a/pdf/web/atp4_10
Department of Defense. (2019). Operational Contract Support (JP 4-10). Retrieved from https://www.jcs.mil/Portals/36/Documents/Doctrine/pubs/jp4_10
Contracting support operations play a critical role in the success of Army operations. Regardless of the location for an operation, contractors and contracting support serve receive a point of emphasis for planning and execution. The Command Sergeant Major (CSM) or Sergeant Major (SGM) must know the impacts contracting has on mission success as well as ensure proper oversight to eliminate fraud, waste, and abuse.
The utilization of contracting and presence of contractors at Army installations persists both within the United States and at operating bases around the world. At one point during operations within Central Command, contractors numbered so high that “the ratio of contractor to military personnel was 1 to 1” (Gould, 2012, p. 24). The purpose and mission of these contractors vary; however, one point is clear: the purpose of each is necessary for mission accomplishment. This means the utilization of contractors frees up Soldiers for their wartime mission, equating contracting to a “significant force multiplier” (Department of Defense, 2019, p. I-11).
CSM or SGM must know the different functions supported by contractors. Contractors receive assignments in logistics, maintenance, sanitation, and security, just to name a few. Without utilizing contracting, senior leaders would need to assign Soldiers to these duties. The ability to eliminate support duties for Soldiers reinforces the importance of contracting for the Army. However, senior enlisted leaders must understand the contracting process and ensure contractors follow the contracts as written. This helps to ensure fiscal responsibility and eliminate waste.
The CSM or SGM must know the impacts contracting has on mission success as well as ensure proper oversight to eliminate fraud, waste, and abuse. Contracting enhances a unit’s ability to achieve mission success by reassigning support roles from Soldiers to contractors. The increase of manpower for unit leadership increases lethality.
References:
Department of the Defense. (2019). Operational contract support (JP 4-10). Retrieved from https://www.jcs.mil/Portals/36/Documents/Doctrine/pubs/jp4_10 ?ver=2019-04-12-133833-707.
Gould, R.. (2012). “Operational contract support: Not just for contingencies.” Army Sustainment, 44(4), 24-26.
***PLAGIARISM FREE***
***PLEASE WRITE IN ACTIVE VOICE***
DB Post Response # 1
In a minimum of 200 words, please provide a response to the post below, with at least one cited source. Please only use the military sources provided and one outside source if using more than one cited source.
Note: Rubrics attached.
RUBRICS
Form 1009C
Contribution to Group Discussion Assessment
Levels of Achievement
Criteria Failed Unsatisfactory Marginal Developing Proficient Exemplary
Quality and
Scope of
Posted Content
0 to 5
points
No or
irrelevant
discussion
participation.
6 to 8 points
Initial posting is
not on topic;
the content is
unrelated to
the discussion
question; post
demonstrates
superficial
thought and
poor
preparation. No
depth in
response to
classmates;
response does
not relate
directly, either
conceptually or
materially, to
classmate
postings.
9 to 11 points
Initial posting
demonstrates a
lack of
reflection and
answers few
aspects of the
discussion
question;
Development
of concepts is
not evident.
Provides
questionable
comments of
fails to offer
new
information to
other posts;
Responses do
not promote
further
discussion of
topic.
12 to 14
points
Initial posting
demonstrates
legitimate
reflection and
answers most
aspects of the
discussion
question; full
development of
concepts is not
evident.
Provides
relevant
comments and
new
information to
other posts; not
all responses
promote further
discussion of
topic.
15 to 17
points
Initial posting
reveals a clear
understanding
of all aspects
of the
discussion
question; uses
factual and
relevant
information;
demonstrates
proficient
development of
concepts.
Demonstrates
understanding
of other posts;
extends
discussion by
building on
previous posts
and offering
perspectives.
18 to 20
points
Initial posting
demonstrates a
thorough
understanding
of all aspects
of the
discussion
question; uses
factual and
relevant
information
from scholarly
sources;
demonstrates
full and
insightful
development of
key concepts.
Demonstrates
critical analysis
of other posts;
extends
meaningful
discussion by
building on
previous posts
and offering
alternative
perspectives.
Collaborative
Communication
Skills
0 to 5
points
No or
irrelevant
discussion
participation.
6 to 8 points
Rarely
provides useful
ideas when
participating in
group
discussions.
Does not
effectively
engage with
classmates by
acknowledging
and accepting
other points of
view. Publically
critical of the
work of others.
Often displays
unproductive
communication
that instigates
a negative
response
rather than
promotes
collaboration.
9 to 11 points
Rarely
provides useful
ideas when
participating in
group
discussions.
Publically
critical of the
work of others.
Rarely displays
a positive
narrative.
Rarely shares
with and
supports the
efforts of
others.
Sometimes
causes undue
tension or
issues in the
discussion
forum.
12 to 14
points
Usually
provides useful
ideas when
participating in
group
discussions.
Rarely
publically
critical of the
work of others.
Often displays
a positive
narrative.
Usually shares
with and
supports the
efforts of
others. Does
not cause
undue tension
or issues in the
discussion
forum.
15 to 17
points
Routinely
provides useful
ideas when
participating in
group
discussion.
Never
publically
critical of the
work of others.
Always
displays a
positive
narrative.
Regularly
shares with
and supports
the efforts of
others.
Maintains a
productive and
collaborative
discussion with
classmates.
18 to 20
points
Always
provides
creative ideas
when
participating in
group
discussion.
Supports the
work of others
while keeping
discussion on
topic. Always
displays a
positive
narrative.
Regularly
shares with
and supports
the efforts of
others. Leads
a productive
and
collaborative
discussion with
classmates.
Critical and
Creative
Thinking
0 to 5
points
No or
irrelevant
discussion
participation.
6 to 8 points
Demonstrates
a lack of
proficiency in
conceptualizing
the problem;
viewpoints and
9 to 11 points
Demonstrates
limited or poor
proficiency in
conceptualizing
the problem;
viewpoints and
12 to 14
points
Demonstrates
developing
proficiency in
conceptualizing
and providing
15 to 17
points
Demonstrates
considerable
proficiency in
conceptualizing
the problem
18 to 20
points
Demonstrates
mastery in
conceptualizing
the problem
and presenting
Name
Description
Rubric Detail
Page 1 of 2
Levels of Achievement
Criteria Failed Unsatisfactory Marginal Developing Proficient Exemplary
assumptions of
experts lack
analysis and
evaluation;
conclusions
are either
absent or
poorly
conceived and
supported.
assumptions of
experts are not
sufficiently
analyzed,
synthesized,
and evaluated;
conclusions
are either
poorly
conceived and
supported.
context to the
problem;
viewpoints and
assumptions of
experts are not
sufficiently
analyzed,
synthesized, or
evaluated;
conclusions
lack clear
rationale.
and presenting
appropriate
perspectives;
viewpoints and
assumptions of
experts are
accurately
analyzed,
synthesized,
and evaluated;
conclusions
are logically
presented with
applicable
rationale.
logical
perspectives;
viewpoints and
assumptions of
experts are
superbly
analyzed,
synthesized,
and evaluated;
conclusions
are logically
presented with
detailed
rationale.
Reference to
Supporting
Sources
0 to 5
points
No or
irrelevant
discussion
participation.
6 to 8 points
Does not refer
to assigned
readings or
other sources;
fails to cite
properly and/or
cites
questionable
sources.
9 to 11 points
Refers to
questionable
sources.
Attempts to cite
sources with
major
deficiencies in
citation format;
fails to use two
or more
sources in
initial post.
Fails to use
any source in
response to
classmates.
12 to 14
points
Refers to
scholarly
sources from
assigned or
outside reading
and attempts to
cite sources
with few
deficiencies in
citation format;
fails to use two
or more
sources in
initial post.
15 to 17
points
Refers to and
properly cites
scholarly
sources from
assigned or
outside reading
and research
with two or
more sources
cited in the
initial post and
at least one
source cited in
response to
classmates.
18 to 20
points
Refers to and
properly cites
recent and
relevant
scholarly
sources from
assigned or
outside reading
and research
with two or
more sources
cited in the
initial post and
at least one
source cited in
response to
classmates.
Style and
Mechanics
0 to 5
points
No or
irrelevant
discussion
participation.
6 to 8 points
Writing
contains
numerous
wordy, vague,
or poorly
constructed
sentences.
Frequent
instances of
grammar,
spelling, and/or
punctuation
errors.
9 to 11 points
Writing
contains few
wordy, vague,
or poorly
constructed
sentences.
Occasional
instances of
grammar,
spelling, and/or
punctuation
errors.
12 to 14
points
Writing
displays a
developing
sense of
academic
writing with
structurally
sound
sentences.
5-10 errors in
grammar,
spelling, and/or
punctuation.
15 to 17
points
Writing
displays a
proficiency of
academic
writing with
clearly written
and structurally
sound
sentences.
Less than 5
errors in
grammar,
spelling, and/or
punctuation.
18 to 20
points
Writing
displays a
mastery of
academic
writing with
clearly written
and structurally
sound
sentences. No
errors in
grammar,
spelling, and/or
punctuation.
Assignment
Requirements
-31 to -31
points
One or more
posts
contain
plagiarism.
-15 to -15
points
Failed to meet
assignment
requirements
and one or
more
submissions
after due date.
-10 to -10
points
Failed to meet
assignment
requirements.
-5 to -5 points
One or more
submissions
after due date.
0 to 0 points
Met all
requirements.
0 to 0 points
Met all
requirements.
Page 2 of 2