How a team is asked for and manned

← All Insights

1. A requirement that starts years early

A team does not appear because someone asks for one in the month it is needed. The manual pushes the work backwards. "Whenever possible, the SCO should forecast requirements for SCET multiple years in advance of the expected deployment date" (SAMM C10.22.7.1), and the forecast is folded into the combatant command’s own longer term planning.

The document that holds it has a fixed horizon. "The CETPP includes all SCO training requirements for a three-year period (current year, budgeting year (current+1), and planning year (current+2))" (SAMM C10.22.7.2). A requirement absent from that plan is not barred, but it arrives as an out of cycle request, and the offices that would resource it have fewer options left.

Requests are made at an annual working group rather than by letter, and the formal paperwork is specified: "Formal requests for SCET teams funded by FMS, IMET, RDFP, and Section 333 are submitted via DD Form 2964" (SAMM C10.22.7.4). The section 333 route is described in section 333 build capacity authority.

2. Where the funding line has to appear

A grant funded requirement has to exist on paper in two places at once. It must be captured in the combatant command proposal and reflected in the case development system, and "the training must be listed on a separate line, by T-MASL during case development" (SAMM C10.22.7.7). That system is the one described in the systems a case runs on.

The line is then given a team track so that the embassy office or the department manager can enter the names of the students who will be taught. A team requirement is therefore visible as a case line long before anyone travels, which is what makes it findable at all.

3. Deployments that bypass the assistance route

Not every team is funded through an assistance program. Where the defense title is the authority, the tasking runs down a military chain instead. "Title 10 SCET deployments are typically tasked by the CCDR directly to a MILDEP component command" (SAMM C10.22.6), with funding coming from the commander who issued the tasking rather than from a partner or a grant.

Two named funds sit behind this route. Under the initiatives fund the chairman of the joint chiefs "may provide funds to CCDRs to deploy personnel in a TDY status to foreign countries to provide military education and training to military and related civilian personnel of that country" (SAMM C10.22.6.1). Separately, under traditional commander activities, "the Secretary of Defense (SECDEF) may direct military-to-military contacts and comparable activities designed to encourage a democratic orientation of defense establishments and military forces of other countries" (SAMM C10.22.6.2), and those funds may not be turned to other articles, services or training unless specifically authorized.

One composition triggers an extra approval wherever the money comes from. "Teams composed of Special Operations Forces (SOF) personnel require U.S. Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) approval" (SAMM C10.22.6), after endorsement by the relevant theater component.

4. What the partner has to arrange

The manual is unusually candid about where the burden falls. It records that "the relative cost and level of difficulty in preparing for a SCET is significantly higher for the partner nation than for the United States" (SAMM C10.22.7.6), listing limited budgets and manning, the number of people with English language capability, logistics, finite ground and air transport, complex approval procedures and ongoing operations.

The conclusion drawn is procedural rather than sympathetic. "Early and continuous coordination with the partner nation can help ensure SCET team mission success" (SAMM C10.22.7.6).

What has to be settled is then itemized. The embassy office works with the mission and the partner to make sure the partner military understands several things in detail. Screening timelines and the personal data required for each student. Training equipment by type and number, and the kinds of facility needed. Transport and communications. Safety equipment, and medical care and evacuation. Then the remaining support arrangements for the team (SAMM C10.22.7.6.1). Several of those items are commercial requirements in everything but name.

5. Vetting the people who will be taught

Screening attaches to the students, not to the team. "Local security screening and Leahy vetting for gross violations of human rights is required for the specific foreign units, including foreign unit commanders attending a U.S. funded SCET/MTT/MET focused on a specific unit(s)" (SAMM C10.22.5.2). Where a course draws individuals from several units, the ordinary individual process applies instead, which is the subject of screening international military students.

Who pays changes the test. "Leahy vetting is not required for IMSs whose SCET/MTT/MET training is funded with national funds" (SAMM C10.22.5.2), and in that case the screening follows a local process developed by the country team and approved by the ambassador.

The record closes after the event rather than before it. Names have to be confirmed as screened before instruction begins, and "The SCO will update the IMS individual identification data in the SC-TMS within 15 days after the completion of training" (SAMM C10.22.5.2.3). That system is described in where the data is held, and who can see it.

6. Choosing who goes

Selection is treated as a question of temperament as much as skill. The departments and commands providing people "should ensure that those personnel have the experience, technical ability, maturity, and personality to accomplish their duties in a manner that is in the best interest of the United States" (SAMM C10.22.8). The requesting office identifies the expertise wanted and any restriction that applies.

Two practical filters follow. Team members must be medically fit for duty in the country named, and a condition needing treatment or hospital care may disqualify a candidate, with non military members’ medical costs charged to the supporting program. And service has to outlast the tour: "Personnel selected for SCET must have enough time remaining in the MILDEP before separation or retirement to complete the required period of deployment" (SAMM C10.22.8.3).

Key terms

CETPP	The embassy office plan holding training requirements over a three year window. SAMM C10.22.7.2.
SCETWG	The annual working group at which team requests are formally submitted.
DD Form 2964	The form used to request a team funded through sales, grant training or the build capacity authority.
Out of cycle request	A request made outside the plan, which is allowed but leaves fewer resourcing options.
Leahy vetting	Human rights vetting of the units and commanders to be trained, not required where the partner pays.

Every statement above links to the document behind it. The full source list for this piece is on the sources page.

This page describes public United States government programs for general information. It is not legal, regulatory or procurement advice, and it does not address the facts of any particular case.

How Sentfore supports this

What the partner is asked to arrange is a list of real requirements on the ground. Sentfore provides secure transport, protective security, facilities and life support for defense programs in complex environments. Requirements can be sent through the contact page.