Posted on Aug 10, 2016
Contracting-Out Intelligence – Daily Intelligence - ClearanceJobs
3.57K
38
16
14
14
0
RP Members and Connections I posted a Question about Contracting a year ago and was asking the question when is enough, enough! Should we be pushing all of these skill sets out the door?
Your feedback please?
IN TODAY’S OPEN-SOURCE HEADLINES . . .
Beyond the more obviously disturbing aspects of warfare, I found over 24 years in the Army the United States’ military’s growing addiction to contractors problematic, for many reasons. Back in the proverbial good old days, organizational security was provided with organic assets—your soldiers. If you weren’t eating MREs, chow was cooked and served in MKTs with organic assets—your cooks. Helicopters were repaired with organic assets—your crew chiefs. Trucks were repaired with organic assets—your diesel mechanics. Then, if they didn’t stay in the Army for the long-haul, those people might very well return to their communities with skills they could use in civilian jobs.
To some degree, it was that kind of training in the military—that, along with the experiences in leadership and service to something greater than themselves—that accounted for the character of those people who became Tom Brokaw’s Greatest Generation. Though we may not have realized it at the time, training soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines was a long-term investment in the strength of our nation. And while conflicts after WWII may not have produced that sort of expertise and experiences in exactly the same kind and magnitude, military experience continued to produce technical expertise, leadership experience, and morals and values that, later, were reinvested into local communities and their economies.
Military service is still doing that, just on a smaller scale, that’s continuing to dwindle.
Your feedback please?
IN TODAY’S OPEN-SOURCE HEADLINES . . .
Beyond the more obviously disturbing aspects of warfare, I found over 24 years in the Army the United States’ military’s growing addiction to contractors problematic, for many reasons. Back in the proverbial good old days, organizational security was provided with organic assets—your soldiers. If you weren’t eating MREs, chow was cooked and served in MKTs with organic assets—your cooks. Helicopters were repaired with organic assets—your crew chiefs. Trucks were repaired with organic assets—your diesel mechanics. Then, if they didn’t stay in the Army for the long-haul, those people might very well return to their communities with skills they could use in civilian jobs.
To some degree, it was that kind of training in the military—that, along with the experiences in leadership and service to something greater than themselves—that accounted for the character of those people who became Tom Brokaw’s Greatest Generation. Though we may not have realized it at the time, training soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines was a long-term investment in the strength of our nation. And while conflicts after WWII may not have produced that sort of expertise and experiences in exactly the same kind and magnitude, military experience continued to produce technical expertise, leadership experience, and morals and values that, later, were reinvested into local communities and their economies.
Military service is still doing that, just on a smaller scale, that’s continuing to dwindle.
Contracting-Out Intelligence – Daily Intelligence - ClearanceJobs
Posted from news.clearancejobs.com
Government Contracts
What Would You Do
Outsourcing
Experience
Edited 8 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 8
4
4
0
This gets tricky.
Former Intelligence Analyst AND Former Government Contractor here. I'm going to ask SSG James J. Palmer IV aka "JP4" to check my logic on this one.
The "inherent" Intelligence Capabilities of the Military Branches and the DoD as a whole are not capable of delivering the "quantity" of product we need to conduct warfare. They absolutely can deliver the "quality" however. But when you have 4 people providing direct support for BN size elements (600-1000 people for a USMC BLT), you need A LOT of "indirect" support.
That indirect support comes from HHQ (like the MEU, RGT, Intel BN, etc) but it also comes from Contractors. At my last unit, MAGTF Staff Training Program, we had more contractors than military (by at least double). Most of them were vets. Without them, we could not perform mission. In addition to the normal contractors, we also had the "Senior Mentors" (Retired General Officers) who acted as SME's for the Program as a whole. Our mission was (VERY simply put) train staff officers how to be staff for General Officers. The learning curve from being a BN/RGT S2O (or any S position) to a Division S2O is massive. Just so many more interactions you have to deal with, not only laterally but hierarchical as well.
Can small units and posts operate without Contractors? Sure. However, like all things in the military, Scale will get you killed. You need a lot more support staff the higher up you go, and you need "permanent" SME level staff when you get to Div/Base+. With constant PSC/Rotations/Deployments, it's impossible to gain the level of expertise needed for ROLE in 2-3 years. Contractors allow us to level DECADES of experience while keeping them in the same place.
Former Intelligence Analyst AND Former Government Contractor here. I'm going to ask SSG James J. Palmer IV aka "JP4" to check my logic on this one.
The "inherent" Intelligence Capabilities of the Military Branches and the DoD as a whole are not capable of delivering the "quantity" of product we need to conduct warfare. They absolutely can deliver the "quality" however. But when you have 4 people providing direct support for BN size elements (600-1000 people for a USMC BLT), you need A LOT of "indirect" support.
That indirect support comes from HHQ (like the MEU, RGT, Intel BN, etc) but it also comes from Contractors. At my last unit, MAGTF Staff Training Program, we had more contractors than military (by at least double). Most of them were vets. Without them, we could not perform mission. In addition to the normal contractors, we also had the "Senior Mentors" (Retired General Officers) who acted as SME's for the Program as a whole. Our mission was (VERY simply put) train staff officers how to be staff for General Officers. The learning curve from being a BN/RGT S2O (or any S position) to a Division S2O is massive. Just so many more interactions you have to deal with, not only laterally but hierarchical as well.
Can small units and posts operate without Contractors? Sure. However, like all things in the military, Scale will get you killed. You need a lot more support staff the higher up you go, and you need "permanent" SME level staff when you get to Div/Base+. With constant PSC/Rotations/Deployments, it's impossible to gain the level of expertise needed for ROLE in 2-3 years. Contractors allow us to level DECADES of experience while keeping them in the same place.
(4)
(0)
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS
COL Mikel J. Burroughs - No disagreement from me, sir. I also look at it from a logistical standpoint. If we didn't use Contractors and DoD Civilians (100% "in house"), our footprint would expand to WWII levels. That model is unsustainable with an AVF. "If" we had a mandatory service requirement, I could see us being able to do it, but outside that, the Military Industrial Machine can't exist with 2M~ troops.
We'd end up with massive bloating, and greater inefficiency than we have now. Combined with that, we wouldn't have (economic) Oversight nearly as strong.
There are absolutely concerns regarding SOFA and Civilians within a warzone, however the actual number is a small percent compared to Domestic Civilians (where our real bloat is).
Were it up to me, we wouldn't have "Veterans" and "Retirees." We would have an Inactive Reserve Force (consisting of recallable V & R type personnel), which could be activated on a GS/GM payscale, but holding a "Specialist" Rank (seperate from the E4 Army one). They would not be in charge of troops, but could be recalled as needed and used where we wanted.
We'd end up with massive bloating, and greater inefficiency than we have now. Combined with that, we wouldn't have (economic) Oversight nearly as strong.
There are absolutely concerns regarding SOFA and Civilians within a warzone, however the actual number is a small percent compared to Domestic Civilians (where our real bloat is).
Were it up to me, we wouldn't have "Veterans" and "Retirees." We would have an Inactive Reserve Force (consisting of recallable V & R type personnel), which could be activated on a GS/GM payscale, but holding a "Specialist" Rank (seperate from the E4 Army one). They would not be in charge of troops, but could be recalled as needed and used where we wanted.
(1)
(0)
PO1 John Miller
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS
Commenting so I can see your entire post (Firefox seems to cut it off...)
Commenting so I can see your entire post (Firefox seems to cut it off...)
(1)
(0)
PO1 John Miller
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS
Now that I can read yours and COL Mikel J. Burroughs's entire posts, I have to say "Right on!" You both explained why contractors are integral much more eloquently than I could have.
Now that I can read yours and COL Mikel J. Burroughs's entire posts, I have to say "Right on!" You both explained why contractors are integral much more eloquently than I could have.
(2)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
If I could add a side note to this conversation having been both myself. After Sept 11, we obviously went through a lot trying to push a lot of people through as possible to meet supply and demand. A lot of the new recruits (myself included) were thrown in AIT over flow. For my MOS I should have done my AIT at Huachuca, but it was too full and my linguistics had to be tested also. So I was sent to DLIFLC instead. So I was trained in more then just my MOS. They had also pulled retired NCOs, CO to help get new units through as quickly an accurately as possible.
I knew a few other 35M who were diploid and not used for there perticular MOS but yes were pushed out by civilian contractors so they just sat waisting time. So before the Bush administration, I do recal President Clinton closed down 129 military bases. Please correct me if I'm wrong on that figure, but this also caused a huge cluster fuck for any and all branches during this time. So the Military had no choice to be use outside resources. It also gave us the upper hand in some ways. Like myself my resume reflects that I worked civilian jobs at the same time as being inlisted.
It was my understanding that a lot of the supposed "Terrorists" were living and working amongst us. So civilian Temp Agencies were contracted to hire Military Intel to pretend to apply as civilians to collect the Intel also needed to locate who may be a possible suspect of operating, funding and traiding secrets. I could see how using someone like me with previous administration skills before inlisting was more effective then using an 18 year old fresh out of high school with no previous civilian working skills. Someone like me was less obvious because I could acclimate to most any situation as I had already worked in different positions in civilian employment. This made me more self efficient as a self starter. So I could get more done faster and collect more Intel while also working the civilian jobs effectively as not to raise suspicion of being anything else.
I believe this also fell under the same catigory as Double MOS and enlisted or reserve who actively contracted with the DoD. I think most active duty were upset about it because of the pay scale and that most contractors got paid a lot of money to do the same thing they were trained to do. Whether true or false, if you had a double MOS during that time and were diploid, it was my understanding you got paid separately for both MOSs. Again, I could be wrong, like civilians some soldiers liked to glorify them self as well as doing more then they really had. So I am unsure of that. Bottom line, with everything going on and not enough military "facilities" to cover the mass supply and demand I think this was our only option at the time.
Hopefully in this new upcoming administration we will see more new bases put back in place so as to not have history repeat itself. And the military and DOD caopporate more effectively Las it was designed to do.
I knew a few other 35M who were diploid and not used for there perticular MOS but yes were pushed out by civilian contractors so they just sat waisting time. So before the Bush administration, I do recal President Clinton closed down 129 military bases. Please correct me if I'm wrong on that figure, but this also caused a huge cluster fuck for any and all branches during this time. So the Military had no choice to be use outside resources. It also gave us the upper hand in some ways. Like myself my resume reflects that I worked civilian jobs at the same time as being inlisted.
It was my understanding that a lot of the supposed "Terrorists" were living and working amongst us. So civilian Temp Agencies were contracted to hire Military Intel to pretend to apply as civilians to collect the Intel also needed to locate who may be a possible suspect of operating, funding and traiding secrets. I could see how using someone like me with previous administration skills before inlisting was more effective then using an 18 year old fresh out of high school with no previous civilian working skills. Someone like me was less obvious because I could acclimate to most any situation as I had already worked in different positions in civilian employment. This made me more self efficient as a self starter. So I could get more done faster and collect more Intel while also working the civilian jobs effectively as not to raise suspicion of being anything else.
I believe this also fell under the same catigory as Double MOS and enlisted or reserve who actively contracted with the DoD. I think most active duty were upset about it because of the pay scale and that most contractors got paid a lot of money to do the same thing they were trained to do. Whether true or false, if you had a double MOS during that time and were diploid, it was my understanding you got paid separately for both MOSs. Again, I could be wrong, like civilians some soldiers liked to glorify them self as well as doing more then they really had. So I am unsure of that. Bottom line, with everything going on and not enough military "facilities" to cover the mass supply and demand I think this was our only option at the time.
Hopefully in this new upcoming administration we will see more new bases put back in place so as to not have history repeat itself. And the military and DOD caopporate more effectively Las it was designed to do.
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
There are some jobs that should be contracted out and then again there are some jobs that shouldn't be COL Mikel J. Burroughs but having no background in intel I'll leave it at that.
(3)
(0)
2
2
0
Good Question Colonel. In my day "Way Back When during the Great War" the Background Checks and all that went with them was done by Civilian DOD Employees and Law Enforcement Officials (To include the Jack Ass from the Local FBI who Shadowed me on my first Leave) but the Actual Business of Intel, COMINT, SIGINT, ELINT, COMSEC was conducted by Me and my Fellow CTs (Wearing Navy Blue and Marine Green). Now at the Fort "Big Daddy DIRNSA" they have a Mix of Civilians and Military. I think that system worked pretty good. When I think about Contracting out what I did, I need not think any further than Edward Snowden.
(2)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google