Satisfaction of experience requirements from one certification level may be applied to the satisfaction of experience requirements of a higher certification level. Each certification level requires a minimum number of training hours covering COR roles and responsibilities as well as fundamental contract rules and regulations.
Each Federal agency may have additional initial certification requirements or equivalent courses to the ones listed in the table above.
If you have any questions about your agency's unique requirements, please contact your Acquisition Career Manager ACM. Individual CORs should also consult with their supervisor and the Contracting Officer to determine any specific training needs.
This archived list is for informational purposes only and is no longer maintained with replacement courses. Fulfillment should be used when appropriate and in compliance with agency policy.
The fulfillment process is based on documentation that demonstrates how a workforce member met or accomplished each of the performance outcomes and learning objectives in a specific course. This may be based on contracting experience, alternative training, or another type of certification in the area of contracting and procurement by another organization or other developmental activities. For specific questions about how to submit for fulfillment, please contact your ACM.
However, this suggests that successful, efficient, and expedient contract performance is the direct result of the role the contracting officer plays in the acquisition process. That is absolutely true—but such performance is not solely the direct result of the contracting officer's role. Acquisitions don't necessarily work like that. Whether understanding what specific product or service is needed, where it can be found, how it will be used, what technology must support it, how success will be measured, how success is defined, and what strategy is the best to utilize, the role of the contracting officer can become limited very quickly.
Everything does not rest squarely on the contracting officer's shoulders—many others possess a multitude of responsibilities before and during all phases of any acquisition process. A supply chain is only as strong as its weakest link, and any weak links in the chain can result in failures. Each and every time responsibility or blame is affixed to the contracting officer when something goes wrong represents a missed opportunity to research what really did not work, which could lead to better insight into how to demonstrably "improve.
If all stakeholders are affected by the effectiveness of acquisition, then all stakeholders must be invested in ensuring success. Blaming contracting officers should be interpreted as a lack of integrity—from the agency head that permits it all the way down to the surrounding cast of players that might have stepped in to prevent the failures in the first place, if only dedicated enough to the mission to do so.
A situation where a GS, 12, or less can be held responsible for major failures in delivering necessary products or services doesn't help change this view. Acquisition "takes a village. If everyone avoids being part of the often dreaded designation of "acquisition workforce," who can credibly comment? In most agencies today, the acquisition workforce is virtually everyone! These SBA representatives may review small business subcontracting plans and provide recommendations for improving small business participation.
When an agency is awarding a contract that includes a subcontracting plan, contracting officers are required to notify these representatives of the opportunity to review the proposed contract. Without taking steps to ensure these opportunities are provided, agencies may not receive and benefit from suggestions for increasing small business participation. For 14 of the 26 contracts, contracting officers did not ensure contractors submitted required subcontracting reports.
After a contract is awarded, contracting officers must review reports contractors submit that describe their progress towards meeting approved small business subcontracting goals. In some cases, contracting officers accepted reports with subcontracting goals different from those in the approved subcontracting plans, with no documentation explaining the difference.
The SBA encourages agency compliance with small business subcontracting plan requirements by providing training to contracting officers and contractors, and by conducting reviews. However, SBA could not provide documentation or information on almost all compliance reviews conducted in fiscal years — SBA has developed new procedures for conducting compliance reviews, but as of mid-March , had yet to fully implement them.
SBA has conducted fiscal year compliance reviews that reflect a first phase of their new procedures. SBA has draft guidance on the new compliance review process, including some specific information regarding what Commercial Market Representatives are to record as part of the compliance review. SBA has begun to conduct compliance reviews in accordance with the guidance, but does not have clearly documented and maintained records for the first phase of these reviews.
Certain federal contracts must have a small business subcontracting plan if subcontracting opportunities exist. But recent Department of Defense Inspector General reports raised concerns about agency oversight of subcontracting requirements. GAO was asked to review oversight of subcontracting plans. GAO made 10 recommendations to strengthen oversight of these plans. The terms that KOs typically use to frame their support to the Warfighter involve detailing the dollars obligated and number or contract actions performed in support of the Warfighter.
More specifically, they need to transform their message from a technical one to a dialogue that is relatable outside of the acquisition enterprise. In deciding how to effectively communicate to their stakeholders, contracting professionals need to consider several things. Frankly, contracting professionals are well versed in focusing adequate energies and efforts in understanding the what, as well as the how. But how much effort is dedicated to understanding why?
Furthermore, are staffs and requirements developers prepared to provide the necessary information about why it is necessary to contract for a requirement or capability?
Equipped with that vital information, development can begin of an effective communications framework to utilize when interacting with the supported commanders and their staffs on requiring activities.
0コメント