We can’t help but notice that the Global Household Goods Contract (GHC) implementation is still woefully behind schedule.
This week, it was shared on X that the GHC is expanding operations to include local shipments (within 50 miles) to 15 additional military installations across seven states. We have lots of questions. Does this announcement mean that there is enough moving capacity under the GHC to fully service these bases? At what volume?
Remember, the initial GHC rollout schedule estimated 400 shipments for September 2024, but they fell short by nearly half. Under that same rollout plan, TRANSCOM is supposed to complete 1,000 moves in October on top of the 400 they were supposed to do in September.
For comparison purposes, the current program moves more than 300,000 military families each year. Since April, only about 145 moves have been completed under the GHC. November’s initial goal was for 10% of the domestic moves to occur under the GHC. That’s just seven business days away.
We calculated last week that the 141 moves completed under the GHC equate to about 4.5 shipments per participating military installation from April through September, so about one each month. Does that mean that the GHC is now prepared to conduct moves at the 31 bases identified – after they fell short of their delivery goals in September?
And then there’s the matter of complexity. These are all simple local moves, requiring no storage capacity. Has the GHC built up the storage capability that will be necessary to service long-distance and interstate moves – to say nothing of international moves?
The GHC was supposed to be all about accountability, so sharing the numbers and hitting the targets seems to be a minimum standard by which to judge the new system. If the GHC is striving for conditions-based implementation, what are the current conditions delaying implementation?
If the GHC has truly built up the capacity to service 10% of domestic moves in November, maybe it’s time to stress-test the new system and let them try.
