From Installation to Readiness Platform: How IMCOM Is Shaping the Future of Army Installations

A conversation with Omar Jones, Lieutenant General (Retired), US Army

As the Army undertakes major transformation efforts — reshaping force structure, streamlining headquarters, and elevating installation resiliency — Army installations are increasingly viewed not just as service providers, but as readiness platforms that enable force projection. In this Q&A, Bibiana Rais speaks with Omar Jones, a retired U.S. Army Lieutenant General and former Commander of the U.S. Army Installation Command (IMCOM), about how IMCOM’s priorities are evolving and what the industry should watch heading into 2026.

Q: Having led IMCOM through a period of sustained operational and fiscal pressure, how do you see the role of Army installations evolving — from providers of services to platforms that directly enable readiness and mission execution? What are the top priorities you see right now?

Installation requirements continue to rise, driven by an increasingly complex threat environment. Resilience – whether against cyber threats or the loss of critical utilities such as energy and water – has become a central requirement, particularly as infrastructure across the enterprise continues to age. At the same time, a significant portion of the force has returned to the continental United States, further increasing demand on domestic installations.

These growing requirements are unfolding against a backdrop of constrained resources. Government funding is largely flat and, in some areas, declining, while the federal workforce is smaller than it was even a year ago. To put the scale of the challenge into perspective, current Army infrastructure requirements are roughly seven times greater than the funding the Army is projected to invest over the next decade.

From an industry standpoint, that gap represents a substantial opportunity. The policy environment is as favorable as it has been in years for private-sector engagement. Tools such as privatization, enhanced use leases, public-private partnerships, and intergovernmental service agreements create meaningful pathways for industry to help meet installation requirements in 2026 and beyond.

Q: IMCOM operates at the intersection of infrastructure, cyber, energy resilience, and essential services. Where do you see the most significant structural or policy gaps today that could affect installation readiness over the next decade?

If you look back 20 or 25 years, resilience was largely framed through a traditional law enforcement lens – focused on physical security, access control, and public safety. Today, the threat landscape is far broader. Installations face risks across cyber, air, land, and other domains simultaneously. With more of the force now based in the United States, installations have become true power-projection platforms. Force must train there, build readiness there, and deploy from there. The military simply cannot execute the missions the nation assigns unless its installations are resilient. The challenges to achieving that resilience are higher today than at any point in the past.

Q: The Army stood up a new Western Hemisphere Command (WESTCOM), consolidating U.S. Army North, U.S. Army South, and Army Forces Command under a single headquarters at Fort Bragg, NC. How should leaders and industry think about downstream implications for installations, posture, and readiness infrastructure?

The Army’s approach to installation management provides stability even amid significant organizational change. The Army operates with a single command — Installation Management Command—that oversees installations and delivers consistent support regardless of how other elements of the force reorganize. Every installation has a senior commander who functions, in many ways, like a mayor. However, the day-to-day operation of the installation is executed by the garrison under IMCOM in support of that senior commander. Whether that commander serves WESTCOM or another command, IMCOM provides continuity and support as the installation mission is executed.

For industry, the engagement strategy matters. Companies focused on a single installation should work closely with the garrison and local leadership. Those seeking to operate across multiple installations should engage IMCOM directly. That alignment ensures industry partners understand how the Army sets installation priorities and tailors agreements and partnerships to the specific needs of each location.

Q: Some observers have suggested that elevating WESTCOM and a Western Hemisphere focus could place new demands on domestic installations. Does that translate into different requirements for housing, training requirements, logistics infrastructure, or other base-level needs compared to prior force posture models?

I do not see a fundamental change in installation requirements. The Army’s theater construct helps align forces regionally and support Combatant Commanders, but the core installation mission remains the same: to support training, readiness, and force preparation. Installations must still provide the ranges, barracks, housing, and infrastructure required to prepare units for deployment. What is changing is not the mission itself, but the intensity of the requirements needed to support it.

Q: There are broader discussions within DoD about consolidating Combatant Commands and reducing the number of four-star headquarters. While far from settled, if such restructuring were pursued, how should IMCOM think about downstream implications for installations and readiness infrastructure?

Combatant Commands depend on the services to provide trained and ready forces. Regardless of how many commands exist or how geographic responsibilities evolve, the responsibility for training and preparing forces remains with the services, and that preparation occurs on installations. From an installation perspective, that fundamental responsibility does not change.

For companies pursuing privatization or public-private partnership opportunities on installations, engagement should remain focused on the services and their installation management organizations. For firms that support headquarters activities, changes at the Combatant Command level could have greater implications, as headquarters may consolidate, expand, or relocate. At the installation level, however, service-led engagement remains the most effective approach.

Q: In 2025, Army leadership launched the Army Transformation Initiative (ATI), emphasizing restructuring, headquarters consolidation, divestment of legacy systems, and acquisition reform. From an IMCOM perspective, how do those decisions translate into installation-level impacts—especially around infrastructure demands, readiness support, and local communities?

In 2024, the Army senior leaders directed an assessment of centralized installation management, which has been the Army’s approach for almost 25 years. The conclusion was clear: a single command managing installations, while allowing senior commanders to set local priorities, remains the right approach. That affirmation is reflected in the fact that ATI introduced little structural change to installation management while reinforcing the critical role of senior commanders to set local priorities. It also validated that the current model is working and well positioned for the future.

A critical component of the ATI is the focus on acquisition reform and deeper collaboration with the private sector. The current policy environment for private-sector support, across defense broadly and installations specifically, is stronger than I have seen in 25 years. The demand is real, and the policy framework is increasingly aligned to enable industry to help meet it.

Q: Looking ahead, what should industry partners supporting IMCOM—across infrastructure, energy, digital modernization, and base services—understand about where installation priorities are heading and how the Army will define success in the coming years?

Resiliency requirements are higher today than ever before, and they will continue to grow. Industry success will depend on the ability to deliver creative, scalable solutions that help close the gap between expanding requirements and constrained government resources.

There are multiple mechanisms available to support that effort, from service contracts and privatization models to enhanced use leases that leverage installation land for mutual benefit, as well as public-private partnerships. Intergovernmental service agreements have also proven effective, allowing the military to partner with local or state governments or public institutions while leveraging existing service providers. Ultimately, the gap between requirements and resources will be filled by the private sector. The opportunity is substantial, and I am optimistic about what industry can deliver.

About Omar Jones

Omar J. Jones IV is a retired U.S. Army Lieutenant General with 33 years of leadership experience across Army installations, logistics, and enterprise sustainment. He retired in 2025 after serving as Commander of the U.S. Army Installation Management Command (IMCOM) from 2022 to 2025 and, previously, as Deputy Commanding General of IMCOM from 2021 to 2022, overseeing Army installations worldwide, including infrastructure, housing, and energy resilience. A graduate of the United States Military Academy at West Point, he later earned a Master of Public Administration from Harvard University and a master’s in National Security Strategy from the National War College.

About Bibiana Rais

Bibiana Rais is a GovCon strategist with two decades of experience helping U.S. and European contractors expand through growth and go-to-market strategies. She specializes in competitive positioning and strategic engagements across defense, diplomacy, security, logistics, and stability operations programs. Drawing on her global track record in the Middle East, Africa, and Eastern Europe, she now advises from Washington, D.C., delivering executive marketing insights, growth strategies, and industry intelligence that drive results in the government contracting sector.