Risk Management and Performance in the Balkans Support Contract
Abstract
Contractors provide the Army with services in a wide variety of settings and circumstances, both domestic and international. Recent pressures on the Army to rely more heavily on contractors and the increasingly ill-defined nature of the battlefield raise serious questions for policymakers. Is the Army getting what it needs from its combat service support (CSS) contracts? Do those contracts present any unrecognized, unmitigated, or unnecessary risks? If the Army is not getting what it needs or is accepting inappropriate risks, what can it do about it? Case studies of CSS contracts can provide some answers. In this report, we present a case study of the Balkans Support Contract (BSC), a CSS contract that has involved deployment. We chose the BSC because of its extensive track record, scope, and size. The contract has provided wide-ranging life support, transportation, and maintenance services to the Army and other end users over several years in a dynamic operating environment. By analyzing the performance of the contract through the lens of risk management, consisting of risk assessment and mitigation, we draw lessons for U.S. policymakers. In so doing, we also compare some of the risks of different sources. We undertake this analysis by examining official records, studies, and press reports and by interviewing customers, contractors, and other observers.
Document Details
- Document Type
- Technical Report
- Publication Date
- Jan 01, 2005
- Accession Number
- ADA439061
Entities
People
- Frank A. Camm
- Victoria A. Greenfield
Organizations
- RAND Corporation