“While not all problems are logistics problems, they inevitably all have a logistics problem set.” – RADM Chris Stone, Director of Strategic Plans, Policy, Logistics (J4/J5), U.S. Transportation Command
Introduction
The Joint Concept for Contested Logistics is clear: we must be ready for contested logistics in every phase of military operations. Even on our best day, we are contested at the operational and strategic level on our highways, railways, and ports, even before the introduction of bad actors in cyberspace. Joint logistics education is critical to meet this coming demand. The Joint Logistics Course (JLC) opens students’ minds to how Service authorities and responsibilities contribute to the joint force problem set. The Joint Logistics Planners Course (JLPC) identifies military solutions to those problem sets faced by combatant commands (CCMDs) and joint task forces (JTFs), applying Service resources combined with unified command plan authorities to achieve national objectives. At the end of these two courses, students are “ready day one” to produce actionable logistics plans in doctrinal formats used by the Joint Staff and the Department of War (DOW). Synchronizing logistics in joint planning is not optional; it is required.
Picture this: A newly assigned CCMD staff planner joins an operational planning team (OPT) and is tasked with developing a logistics plan for a high-stakes contingency operation. With no training in joint logistics planning, they struggle to translate strategic guidance into actionable sustainment requirements, adjudicate authorities, and prioritize scarce resources. The result? Delays in decision making, misaligned priorities, desynchronization with the scheme of maneuver, and a commander unable to act decisively.
This scenario is all too common and is exactly why the JLPC was created. JLPC trains logisticians to produce immediately usable and actionable staff products under pressure of time and security classification constraints. They include concise risk identification with practical mitigations, prioritizing requests so tradeoffs are visible and contain timelines, funding sources, and next steps to enable CCMD and JTF planning execution without delay.
The course sponsor, VADM Dion English, Director of the Joint Staff J4, clearly states “To effectively deter aggression, our logistical capabilities must be as formidable as our combat power. This requires a deep and continuous investment in the education of our logisticians, ensuring they are not just suppliers, but strategic thinkers who can anticipate the needs of the joint force in a contested environment. Well-educated logisticians are strategic deterrents in their own right, capable of building resilient and adaptable supply chains that can withstand and recover from any disruption.”
The joint force requires planners who understand joint authorities, prioritize scarce resources, and convert logistics risks into actionable decisions. By addressing logistics friction that narrows options and slows tempo, JLPC trains planners to translate strategy into synchronized sustainment solutions. The 10-day, Secret-level course compresses judgment, authority adjudication, prioritization, and risk communication skills, enabling graduates to contribute immediately to OPTs, joint planning groups, and JTF/CCMD staffs.
JLPC progressed from concept to an approved course that meets joint force needs in just one year. This significant achievement was a collaborative effort involving the Army Sustainment University, the Center for Joint and Strategic Logistics for curriculum advice, U.S. Transportation Command (USTRANSCOM), the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) for scenario realism and subject matter expertise, and U.S. Africa Command (USAFRICOM) for theater context.
How JLPC Differs from the JLC
JLPC and JLC exist on the same educational spectrum. The curriculum is not mutually exclusive; it is supporting. In a way, JLC is the peanut butter to JLPC’s jelly; each is outstanding on its own, but together they are dynamic!
JLC is instructor-led and gives a broad, foundational orientation in two weeks to understand joint doctrine, enterprise roles, and Service capabilities.
JLPC is student-led and hands-on (30% lecture and 70% application). Prerequisites include JLC and Joint Professional Military Education Phase I, waiverable when appropriate. Where JLC builds understanding, JLPC builds immediate staff employability and deliverability.
Course Structure and Learning Design
Design Intent
Modern joint operations require logisticians who translate strategic guidance into theater logistics objectives, identify and apply authorities, prioritize scarce resources, and present risk in commander-focused terms. JLPC enhances joint logistics education by closing the gap between Service-centric training and the multi-domain, multi-agency realities of joint planning.
Format and Approach
JLPC emphasizes practice leveraging doctrinal anchors to set the frame. Most student time is scenario-driven planning with time-bounded injects, subject matter expert (SME) panels, and iterative coaching. Student teams lead planning while faculty observe, coach, and grade against concise rubrics tied to observable behaviors.
Real Inputs, Cross-Functional Realism
The scenarios for JLPC were developed in collaboration with the Joint Enabling Capabilities Command (JECC) and leverage JECC Planners Course (JPC) scenarios. The JECC USAFRICOM scenario has been adapted to be joint logistics planner centric. A crisis planning scenario inspired by current and previous USAFRICOM logistics problem sets was also added to the curriculum. Students begin with mission analysis and course of action (COA) briefs produced by recent JPC graduates. Those peer-authored, cross-functional inputs intentionally reflect non-logistics perspectives. Working from imperfect, real-world products forces logisticians to translate operational aims and assumptions into prioritized logistics requirements and then fit those requirements into the scheme of maneuver.
Phases and Clear Outcomes
Learning in JLPC progresses through tightly linked modules, each mapped to observable behaviors and assessed with practical deliverables designed for students to practice the exact tasks they will perform on a CCMD staff.
Strategic Context and Operational Environment — Students frame the theater, identify authorities and constraints, and translate strategic guidance into prioritized sustainment tasks. This phase produces a theater logistics analysis and feeds into staff running estimates to show students how their framing informs commander decisions.
Planning — Students apply theater priorities across the joint planning process (JPP): conducting logistics support analyses, developing COAs, producing a concept of logistics support and drafting Annex D and supporting estimates. This phase further develops students understanding of the delineation of authorities between CCMD and services while reinforcing their linkages to overarching national objectives.
Chairman’s Special Areas of Emphasis — Students address contested logistics and survivability, Joint Materiel Priorities and Allocation Board (JMPAB) tradeoffs, and military assisted departure (MAD) planning while practicing authority adjudication and interagency coordination. The output of this module is a contested‑logistics, crisis‑focused MAD plan that identifies authorities, assigns interagency tasks, and recommends prioritized mitigations. Each phase builds on the last so graduates leave with a connected set of skills: theater framing that leads to executable plans that embed risk JTF and CCMD priorities and crisis products that show how those priorities survive stress.
Behaviors That Matter, Realism That Counts — Why do we focus on measurable behaviors and Secret classification‑level realism? We measure observable actions and train inside realistic, classified constraints. Clear behavioral checkpoints let faculty give targeted feedback, let students practice the exact moves they will make on a staff, and ensure assessments map to commander expectations. These examples are not theoretical — using Joint Risk Assessment Methodology (JRAM) language and linking actions to the authorities matrix are the concrete skills we test. Running exercises at the Secret classification level forces decision making with real information limits, speeds judgment formation, and produces products commanders can use immediately.
The Evolution Leading to the USTRANSCOM Pilot — What We Tested and What We Learned
As mentioned, JLPC evolved through iterative pilots that sharpened scope, tradeoffs, and outcomes. Below is a concise, chronological account showing how each step was built on the last and why those changes mattered.
Inception
The joint force identified a distinct training gap, and we were directed to create JLPC. At the beginning, we clarified how JLPC differed from existing courses: focus on theater framing, staff‑level sustainment actions, and observable outcomes rather than broad doctrine review.
Pilot 1 (September 9–20, 2024)
We tested the initial course structure by leveraging joint service academic, CCMD, and DLA subject matter expertise. The pilot validated the core concept and identified friction points in group dynamics and inconsistencies in faculty intervention, leading to uneven student experiences. Addressing these gaps and aligning instructor expectations, timing, and scoring improved feedback consistency and made performance measurement more reliable.
Pilot 2 (December 2–13, 2024)
Using lessons learned from Pilot 1, we introduced contested logistics concepts, incorporated relevant and applicable strategic documents, and added multinational command relationships to make coordination and authority issues explicit. The prerequisites ensure everyone starts with the same baseline skills. These changes transformed exercises from abstract tasks into real decision-making challenges, compelling students to justify choices as they would in an operational staff environment.
Pilot 3 (April 28–May 9, 2025)
At this juncture, we incorporated the chairman’s special areas of emphasis — contested logistics, JMPAB tradeoffs, and MAD planning — and introduced ADVANA and Maven Smart System (MSS) as the course’s primary sources for logistics planning and data mining. This made scenarios more challenging, requiring students to reconcile competing priorities using live data and produce clear outputs. Using ADVANA and MSS reduced manual data mining, enabled faculty to identify and correct mistakes earlier, and provided students with hands-on experience using the tools and products they will employ on real staffs.
Pilot 4 (September 2–12, 2025)
The final validation emphasized exportability and realism: we demonstrated mobile training team delivery, conducted the course at the Secret level, and introduced a crisis-focused MAD planning scenario. Final curriculum edits addressed remaining gaps, resulting in a packaged, classified-capable course that can be taught reliably across locations. Each pilot enhanced the connection between learning objectives and measurable outcomes.
USTRANSCOM Hosts the Final Operational Test
USTRANSCOM is DOW’s truly global CCMD, the single manager for deployment and distribution capabilities central to JLPC’s core dilemmas. Hosting the culminating pilot provided domain-relevant injects, access to SMEs, and realistic discussions about closure, throughput, and allocation trade-offs that are hard to recreate in a classroom.
What We Tested
The final operational test (or pilot) validated curriculum content, tested instructor pacing and rubric reliability, and confirmed the effectiveness of the mobile training team model. Conducted from September 2–12, 2025, the pilot used current USAFRICOM documents and notional planning orders. Students produced doctrinal joint staff products while faculty provided real-time coaching and formal feedback after each major exercise.
Key Observations
- Strategic Context: Students demonstrated doctrinal literacy and effectively framed the theater. However, they struggled to translate this framing into prioritized logistics tasks that enable rapid commander action.
- Planning: Mission analysis sometimes did not convert diplomatic, legal, or political constraints into actionable logistics planning factors. Materiel prioritization under constrained lift and competing CCMD requests yielded different team outcomes. Iterative injects and immediate feedback led to clear improvements.
- Society of Automotive Engineers/MAD: Contested-environment injects prompted practical survivability ideas and exposed uneven familiarity with interagency roles and responsibilities. MAD exercises forced teams to surface assumptions and demonstrate authority linkage and interagency coordination steps.
Representative Exercise: Cuban Missile Crisis Reframed
This module had students apply modern JRAM to a historical case study of the Cuban Missile Crisis. Starting from historical objectives and modern doctrine, teams prioritized and identified military and non-military (strategy) risk. The exercise produced clear trade-off analysis and showed how doctrine applied to historical context sharpens judgment when recommending risk acceptance, avoidance, or mitigation.
Instructional Takeaways
Short, focused corrections by faculty, SMEs, and senior leaders produced the biggest gains: 10‑minute micro lessons on authority adjudication or prioritization sequencing immediately clarified expectations and improved outputs. Pre‑assigning critical roles based on a commodity or joint logistics function reduced handoff friction and raised product quality and timeliness. Instructors used the pilots to sharpen their own sustainment judgment, standardize scoring, and practice faster, more targeted interventions.
Senior Leader Feedback
The JLPC pilot at USTRANSCOM exceeded expectations, yielding significant improvements in student outputs and faculty practices. Senior leaders, including RADM Chris Stone (Director, USTRANSCOM J4/5), actively shaped the curriculum, emphasizing that logistics issues often arise from non-logistics problems. USTRANSCOM J5 planners participated in JPP briefs and provided operational feedback. LTG Jered Helwig (Deputy Commander, USTRANSCOM) highlighted the importance of training as a test bed for real operations. While reviewers praised many student products, they recommended tighter alignment with joint staff expectations, maintaining a focus on authority understanding and logistics integration in contested environments. The pilot produced staff-quality annexes under classified conditions, shortened decision timelines, and instilled confidence that JLPC graduates can deliver immediately actionable operational products.
Student Feedback
Students appreciated the hands-on, student-led format and the Secret-level realism. Practical requests included short refresher modules on authorities and funding and an anonymized repository of previous graduate and real staff products. They also requested more practice on interagency coordination and clearer guidance on which authorities govern specific actions.
Shared Priorities
Much like the recent remarks of the Chief of Staff of the Army at the 2025 Association of the United States Army (AUSA) conference emphasizing continuous transformation, JLPC’s evolution is far from over and constantly evaluated. Faculty, students, and senior leaders all agreed on near-term improvements and fully understood the importance of adapting the course to meet future operational environment needs.
Operational Impact
JLPC shortens staff ramp-up and reduces the need for senior adjudication. Graduates return with templates, authority awareness, and practiced risk communication so they can contribute immediately. The course awards 1.5 joint education credits and Army students receive the P1 (Theater Planner) for future talent management and assignment consideration.
Measured Outcomes
At course completion, 90% of students reported a significant improvement in their ability to plan joint logistics. Six to 12 months after graduation, alumni continue to report continued operational benefits, indicating immediate skill gains and lasting value.
JLPC Next Steps
- Translate outcomes into behaviors. For each course section, define two to three observable actions. These behaviors make assessment clear and remediation direct.
- Formalize an inject escalation ladder. Predefine inject types, timing, and scoring so cohorts face calibrated, progressively harder decision stressors and faculty can benchmark progress.
- Standardize templates. Provide concise, CCMD-vetted templates to reduce grading variance and give students a durable schema for rapid production.
- Preserve Secret where it matters. Keep classified elements that materially improve realism; use sanitized, unclassified variants when classification is not required.
What JLPC Delivers
JLPC transforms doctrine into capability. Graduates align Service contributions with joint plans, clarify authorities and support relationships, and communicate logistics risks in actionable terms. Commands with JLPC graduates experience faster materiel prioritization, improved annexes that withstand staff transitions, maintained operational tempo, and logistics teams that enhance commander options.
Call to Action — Enroll Your Logistics Planners
If you want logisticians who can contribute on day one, send them to JLPC. Enrollment is open to qualified officers, warrant officers, NCOs, civilians, and contractors who meet all prerequisites. To nominate personnel or register, contact your Service training manager or the JLPC faculty for eligibility and scheduling details.
--------------------
COL Steve Erickson served as the commandant of the Logistics Corps & Army Sustainment University at Fort Lee, Virginia. He has completed significant training courses, including the High Performance Leader Program as a Center for Creative Leadership Fellow, the U.S. Army Command & General Staff Course focused on Operational Planning & Leadership, and the Total Army Instructor Course. His higher education includes a Master of Science degree in national strategic studies from the Air War College and a Master of Science degree in Adult Education from Kansas State University.
LTC Brian Johnson is the chief of the Joint Logistics Education Branch at the Army’s Logistics School. He previously served as speechwriter to the commander of U.S. Transportation Command, joint mobility operations officer, brigade and battalion executive officer, and support operations officer. He is a graduate of the MG (R) James Wright Master of Business Administration Program at the College of William and Mary.
MAJ Avraham “Avi” Behar is the director for the Joint Logistics Planners Course at the Army’s Logistics School. He previously served as a joint logistics instructor, executive officer, support operations officer, and research fellow. He is the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College Distinguished Master Sustainer for 2020 and a graduate of the U.S. Air Force’s Advanced Logistics Readiness and Operations Course and the Indian Army’s Senior Management Ordnance Course. He holds a Master of Science degree from Michigan State University and the Command and General Staff College.
--------------------
This article was published in the winter 2026 issue of Army Sustainment.
RELATED LINKS
The Current issue of Army Sustainment in pdf format
Current Army Sustainment Online Articles
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Social Sharing