TE-G.1.3 After Action Review.pdf
PDF 80 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Ft Carson BASOPS (Base Operations Services)
- Solicitation number
- W5168W-24-R-0009
- Issued by
-
Department of the Army
About this file
The document provided is an After-Action Review (AAR) Guidance that outlines the purpose and process of conducting an AAR to assess a project or major activity. The AAR aims to discover what happened, why, reassess direction, and review successes and challenges. It focuses on answering five key questions: 1) what was supposed to happen, 2) what was the reality, 3) what went well, 4) what did not go well, and 5) what should be changed for next time. The AAR is not a critique, but rather a tool to identify lessons learned and inform future efforts.
The related federal contract opportunity is a solicitation for Base Operations Support Services at the U.S. Army Fort Carson, CO. The contract will include a range of Common Level of Services (CLS) such as grounds maintenance, pavement clearance, facility maintenance, heating and cooling services, and wastewater services. The solicitation is being issued by the Mission and Installation Contracting Command-Installation Readiness Center on behalf of the Mission and Installation Contracting Command-Fort Carson.
View the file
Other files
Show 40 more
50 files listed here. See the rest on GovTribe.
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
TE-G.1.3
AAR Format 1 Jan 2023
AFTER-ACTION REVIEW GUIDANCE
An After-Action Review (AAR) is an assessment conducted after a project or major activity that allows team members and leaders to discover (learn) what happened and why, reassess direction, and review both successes and challenges. The AAR does not have to be performed at the end of a project or activity; it can be performed after each identifiable event within a project or major activity, thus becoming a live learning process.
The AAR should review the tasks and goals of the activity as they were initially understood. It should also evaluate whether these tasks and goals were effective after implementing the activity. Hence the AAR serves as a tool that can potentially redefine goals or future tasks. The AAR also identifies next steps or action items towards meeting these goals after the activity itself has finished. It is not a critique. In fact, it has several advantages over a critique:
• It does not judge success or failure.
• It attempts to discover why things happened.
• It focuses directly on the tasks and goals that were to be accomplished.
• It encourages team members to surface important lessons in the discussion.
• More team members participate so that more of the project or activity can be recalled and more lessons can be learned, shared, and incorporated back into the effort or subsequent efforts.
The AAR will seek to answer five key questions:
1) what was supposed to happen
2) what was the reality
3) what went well
4) what did not go well
5) what should be changed for next time.
TE-G.1.3
AAR Format 1 Jan 2023
• What was supposed to happen? (Date/Time of Event, Duration, etc)
• What was the reality? (Did the Snow get cleared IAW contract terms? Where there areas that happened that should have been completed but weren’t? TE’s inaccurate?)
• What went well? (Execution, scheduling, etc)
• What did not go well? (Personnel shortages, equipment failures, response to those failures, notifications, etc)
• What should be changed for next time? (Changes you can control, potential changes you can’t control/recommendations)
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .