SDDC Announces “Program Efficiency Review”
March 10, 2011 
7 Comments
During this week’s AMSA Annual Conference’s Military Summit, Lt. Col. Derek Oliver and John Johnson discussed a new SDDC initiative, a “Program Efficiency Review”. The goal of this process will be to review all aspects of the DP3 business rules and program, and decide whether changes are warranted.
While they did indicate that the review would be comprehensive, and cover all parts of the program, a couple of topics were mentioned specifically:
- Number of TSPs: SDDC will be asking if they “have the right number of TSPs in the program.” If they decide that they do not, then they will attempt to decide what that correct number would be. Specifically, Lt. Col. Oliver stated that they would try to figure out how to ensure that large TSPs who have made significant investments in the program maintain market share, and how to allow new entrants a chance to earn business in the program.
- CFAC: A related topic in the review would be rules around Common Financial and Administrative Control (CFAC). Specifically, are the current CFAC rules being followed, and should the CFAC rules be changed?
- Short Fuse Distribution: They will review whether the shotgun approach to distributing short fuse shipments should be changed. It appears they will consider whether the best value calculation should factor into the awarding of short fuse shipments, as opposed to the current process that awards the shipment to the first taker.
Both Lt. Col. Oliver and John Johnson went out of their way to emphasize that this will be a long process, and there will be plenty of notice before changes are made. They both stated that there will be no changes mid-cycle, so that 2012 would be the earliest industry would see any changes. Also, John Johnson stated that they would do their best to give industry a year’s notice of the changes, so that it could be 2013 before changes are implemented.
They stressed they wanted to take the time to go through all the details and make sure the review was complete and thorough. Lt. Col. Oliver also stated that it was his desire to have the new rules in place before the opened the gates to new entrants. While the review would be started internally, they stated that SDDC would solicit feedback and input from industry.
Further information on the Program Efficiency Review will be given at the Personal Property Forum (PPF) held April 7th, after the SDDC Symposium in Dallas.
What are you thoughts on the proposed Program Efficiency Review? What changes do you think SDDC will end up making as a result of this review? Feel free to use the comments below to share your opinion.
Related Posts
- SDDC Offers Update on Program Efficiency Review , Seeks Industry Feedback - April 11th, 2011
- SDDC, JPMO-HHGS Give Updates at NDTA - September 27th, 2010
- PPF Covers Many Topics - November 16th, 2010
Yes, I like that expression ‘short fuse’ those could be the first that explode, this summer.
If they push any real changes to 2013 they’ll have solved the issue of “correct number of TSPs in the program” as most TSPs
will be broke by then.
when you say most tsps will be broke..
are you refering the moving and storage agents? If so- i soon will be out of a job if things don’t change soon. How is it that the tsp can distribute jobs to whomever they want? Favoritism? Running Rampid!
Well, from my point of view the house is burning and SDDC is wanting to pick out new drapes.
I understand that they are talking about a “comprehensive review”, but the points SDDC has highlighted in their release indicates that they might not know what the real problems are just yet.
I think if I were running SDDC, I might be looking for some new “industry insiders” for this upcoming “comprehensive review”. Pardon me, but from where I stand, the ones they have now aren’t making it…..
A problem can’t be fixed unless FIRST the problem is identified. As of right now, I don’t think SDDC is talking to the right people for the issues to even be identified, let alone corrected.
It is going to be an “interesting” summer, and a VERY interesting comprehensive review to fillow.
All of this is almost funny, but not really…..
“Lt. Col. Oliver stated that they would try to figure out how to ensure that large TSPs who have made significant investments in the program maintain market share….”
Did the moving and storage companies (i.e. AGENTS) get a similar assurance?
Remember moving and storage companies? You know, the ones who own virtually all of the assets and employ virtually all of the people who actually move personal property?
Oh well, I suppose if moving and storage companies were “more significant” perhaps they could get an assurance or two as well.
You said it!
Any kind of loophole, a way to go around the tsp and be awarded a shipment from the base? How is it legal for tsp to use the agents score to attain jobs and not distribute the jobs evenly to their agents?