Federal IT contract passes $1 billion mark
July 21, 2010 by cs
A major contract the federal government uses to procure multiple IT products and services has surpassed the $1 billion mark in task orders.
Alliant, a 10-year government-wide acquisition contract (GWAC) introduced in 2007 with a $50 billion ceiling, reached the milestone faster than other GWACs that preceded it, the Answer and Millennia contracts, according to a blog post by Edward O’Hare, assistant commissioner of the General Service Administration’s federal acquisition service office of integrated technology services.
GWACs are multiple-award, indefinite delivery, and indefinite quantity contracts that allow the government to purchase IT products and services without having to go through the competition process normally required of government procurement. The government began using them as a way to cut acquisition costs and streamline the process.
In his post, O’Hare cited several reasons he thinks Alliant has achieved $1 billion faster than some other contracts of its kind.
He said the contract is used by all Department of Defense (DoD) branches as well as many civilian agencies, including the Department of Homeland Security and the State Department.
Moreover, 24 of 59 prime contractors have won awards on 45 task orders through Alliant, with the GSA receiving an average of four bids per task order and no protests about unfair practices, O’Hare said.
Some of the federal government’s largest and most innovative IT projects — such as smart buildings — use Alliant, he added.
O’Hare acknowledged that there been concerns raised by industry groups about duplicative GWACs that actually end up costing the government money and resources rather than being more cost-effective.
However, O’Hare said that GWACs benefit companies who feel compelled to bid on as many government contracts as possible, because the all-inclusive nature of the contracts saves tens of thousands in bidding costs. This benefit, in turn, is returned to the federal government.
“These costs are not just the ‘cost of doing business’; they are passed on to the government and eventually to the taxpayer,” he said. “I don’t see how that benefits anyone in the long run.”
– by Elizabeth Montalbano, InformationWeek - July 12, 2010
URL: http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=225702919
Defense mandates disclosure of contract bundling
July 20, 2010 by cs
Defense Department procurement officials who combine a number of small contracts to create one larger deal now must disclose their actions on a public website, according to an interim rule published in the Federal Register on Tuesday.
The practice, known as contract bundling, has long been a top concern of small businesses owners, who argue larger acquisitions will be out of their financial reach. And, while the change to the Defense Acquisition Regulations System does not prohibit contract bundling, it will shine a light on an often-secretive process and possibly provide a window of opportunity for creative and quick-thinking small businesses.
At least 30 days before issuing a solicitation, Defense contracting officers now will be required to publish a notice on FedBizOpps, a federal website that advertises potential contracting opportunities, of their intent to bundle the requirement. If the department has determined that “measurably substantial benefits are expected to be derived as a result of bundling,” it must describe those potential savings.
The rule, which went into place immediately and applies only when the contract is funded entirely by the Pentagon, implements a provision in the 2010 National Defense Authorization Act.
The Federal Acquisition Regulation previously required agencies simply to notify the affected incumbent contractor of their intentions to bundle a requirement. The contractor, generally a small business, would then have the opportunity to engage the government and possibly retain some unbundled business.
But, by mandating broader notification of all contract bundling, a wider swath of the small business community could have the opportunity “to compete for more work of which the firms might otherwise have been unaware,” the notice said.
In a separate rule issued on Tuesday in the Federal Register, the Pentagon now will require its contracting officers to notify congressional defense or intelligence committees within 30 days of issuing sole-source task or delivery orders in excess of $100 million.
The head of the Defense component, meanwhile, must determine in writing that sole-source procurements meet one of four criteria:
- The task or delivery orders expected under the contract are so integrally related that only one source can reasonably perform the work;
- The contract provides only for firm-fixed-price task or delivery orders;
- Only one source is qualified and capable of performing the work at a reasonable price to the government;
- The contract is necessary because of exceptional circumstances.
The department is accepting public comments on both rules through Sept. 13.
– By Robert Brodsky – GovExec.com – July 14, 2010
GSA releases $5 billion satellite communications RFPs, including one earmarked for small business
July 14, 2010 by cs
The General Services Administration (GSA) has released the final request for proposals (RFPs) for procuring billions of commercial satellite communications for both civilian and defense agencies.
The RFPs, one of which is full and open and another for small businesses, are to provide Custom Satcom Solutions (CS2) — end-to-end satellite services available as part of the Future Comsatcom Services Acquisition Program (FCSA). The combined RFPs could result in more than $5 billion in purchases.
FCSA is a recent agreement with the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) through which the GSA manages the purchase of satellite services for federal agencies. The Department of Defense (DoD) also purchases services through the program.
For the last decade, federal government customers have procured custom satcom services through a combination of vehicles from both the DISA and the GSA, according to the GSA Web site. However, the agencies thought that with multiple contracts expiring in the 2011-2012 time frame, they should come up with a joint acquisition strategy.
The idea behind combining the purchases for the two agencies is to avoid any redundant acquisition costs. Officials also wanted to create a common marketplace for vendors to offer their services.
Contracts the FCSA is replacing include DISA’s Inmarsat Airtime and Equipment contract, the Defense Information System Network Satellite Transmission Service-Global pact, and the GSA’s Satcom II program.
The deadline for submissions to the RFPs is Aug. 12 at 4:30 PM EDT.
– by Elizabeth Montalbano, InformationWeek – July 9, 2010 - URL: http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=225702772
Procurement officials face mounting pressures
July 1, 2010 by cs
The to-do list for government’s top procurement officials seems to grow longer by the day: Drastically reduce contract spending and curb use of high-risk purchasing techniques. Bring thousands of contractor positions back in house without racking up a huge tab or sacrificing quality of work. Support a growing war in Afghanistan while managing a dwindling presence in Iraq. And those are just some of the tasks landing on the desks of chief acquisition officers.
If 2009 was the year for introducing dramatic reform in the acquisition field, 2010 is shaping up as a mammoth implementation headache, with a virtually endless supply of directives, guidance and internal decisions that have to be moved from paper to reality. Nonetheless, procurement officials are eager for the challenge.
“Overall, it’s a very exciting time to be working in the procurement arena,” says Maureen Shauket, senior procurement executive at the U.S. Agency for International Development. “We have the opportunity to make a fundamental difference in the way we are delivering developmental assistance.”
Scrubbing the Books
In July 2009, the Obama administration unveiled a bold vision for reducing contract spending and eventually decreasing the government’s dependence on private sector workers for critical skills. The Office of Management and Budget directed agencies to save 7 percent from their baseline contract spending by 2011 and to reduce by 10 percent their use of high-risk acquisition methods, including sole-source, cost-reimbursement and time-and-materials contracts. Altogether, OMB expects these reforms will save $40 billion annually.
But implementing a massive and immediate overhaul of the $533 billion annual federal procurement system is like cleaning a filthy house with a toothbrush – sure you can get the job done, but it’s going to take a while and you will get your hands dirty. During the past year, acquisition leaders have scrubbed their books for opportunities to cut fat, strategically align procurements and switch to safer contract setups. While it’s still early in the implementation process, officials say the results are promising.
For example, the Environmental Protection Agency is saving money by using strategic sourcing to consolidate its Washington telecommunications requirements. The agency also is moving many of its older and traditionally more stable service contracts from cost-reimbursement to fixed-price models, which are considered safer because costs can be better controlled.
“This was a very large effort to try to find the areas where we could save these funds,” says Chuck Gherardini, acting director at EPA’s Office of Acquisition Management. “We found the savings in different places and in different organizations. And now we are in the process of trying to get together a reporting mechanism to figure out exactly how much we saved.”
For international crisis relief agencies such as USAID, eliminating contracts is not always an option. Abandoning an agreement to deliver clean drinking water to Haiti, for instance, would have devastating effects on victims of the January earthquake there. To find savings, the agency has pursued traditional cost-cutting options such as shifting away from cost-reimbursement contracts and breaking down large indefinite delivery-indefinite quantity awards into smaller contracts. It also is relying more on local businesses to engage in reconstruction in Haiti and Afghanistan.
“Rather than saying that we will spend less money in Haiti, we are going to find more efficient and effective means [of contracting] so that we can ensure that more development is taking place with the same amount of funds,” Shauket says.
The Education Department faces still a different set of challenges. The size, complexity and rapidly changing requirements of its contracts, particularly for major studies, make it difficult to set a fixed price, says Hugh Hurwitz, deputy chief financial officer and senior procurement executive. The department, however, is trying a number of alternatives to meet the administration’s directives, from designing contracts with hybrid cost structures to scrutinizing higher-risk procurements.
“The minute we think we have a high-risk contract we’re [using] a contract review board,” Hurwitz says. “What we don’t want to do is get halfway down, be ready to issue the solicitation and say, ‘Why is this cost reimbursement?’ or ‘Why is this sole source?’ when it could have been fixed price or otherwise competed.”
The Veterans Affairs Department, meanwhile, has focused on issuing fewer sole-source contracts. The department raised its competition rate in one year from 49 percent to 72 percent, according to Glenn D. Haggstrom, executive director of VA’s Office of Acquisition, Logistics and Construction.
One reprieve for overburdened CAOs is Recovery Act contracting finally is beginning to wind down, as procurement reform heats up. After a whirlwind year of spending, agencies now have obligated nearly three-quarters of the $275 billion Congress provided for stimulus contracts, grants and loans.
Senior acquisition officials have borne much of the burden for accomplishing this, issuing billions of dollars in awards to improve the nation’s infrastructure, energy and education systems; managing projects that were heavily scrutinized by lawmakers and the media; and prodding sometimes resistant recipients to report their spending. As the dust begins to settle, procurement officials are optimistic taxpayers will receive a sound return on their investment.
“Acquisition professionals have negotiated better prices than estimated, allowing VA to reallocate remaining funds to other needed projects,” Haggstrom told the House Veterans’ Affairs Committee in December 2009.
Lightening the Load
Another glimmer of hope for CAOs is the Obama administration supports hiring more help. The White House’s fiscal 2011 budget includes $133 million to boost the size of procurement workforces at civilian agencies by about 5 percent. The plan is to hire mostly entry-level and midcareer employees from industry for a host of contracting-related positions.
“This is a once-in-a-generation opportunity for us,” Daniel I. Gordon, administrator of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy at the Office of Management and Budget, said during a March interview. “And it’s a once-in-a-generation challenge for us. We have to recruit people in a smart way, and then once they come on board we need to train them, supervise them and promote them in a smart way.”
The nation’s economic downturn has helped with the recruitment phase. “We’re seeing the best applicants we’ve ever seen both in terms of quality and quantity,” Hurwitz says. “We have even gone so far as to create a wait list of people we’d like to consider for future jobs. We just didn’t have enough vacancies to hire them all.”
Agencies governmentwide have been developing long-term strategic plans to boost the size of their acquisition workforce, which has been stagnant for more than a decade. VA, for example, opened the first federal civilian agency acquisition academy in the fall of 2008 to grow and train its contracting staff.
USAID is planning to double its overseas presence and build up its assisted acquisition workforce in Washington. “We are trying to increase the number of contracting officers and contracting officer technical representatives so that we can make decisions on development interventions that are not based on staffing,” Shauket says.
At Education, applications have been pouring in for entry-level contracting positions, but not for slots at the GS-12 level and higher. “We have to bite the bullet and hire young people that don’t know a lot about contracts and then train them, which is nice because they learn to do it the way we want it done and don’t bring baggage and bad habits,” Hurwitz says. “But on the other hand they don’t know anything. The workload doesn’t go away. . . . It puts more burden on the staff that is there, but in the end it pays out.”
The hiring spree has been most visible at the Defense Department, which announced last year that by 2015 it would increase its acquisition workforce from 127,000 to 147,000 – a level not reached since 1998. About half the 20,000 jobs will be new positions while the other half will be work previously performed by contractors. As of the end of March, the department had added about 4,800 employees, 1,500 of whom were associated with insourcing and 3,300 of whom were new hires, according to Defense officials. The latest Pentagon planning estimates indicate the department will exceed its original 20,000 goal, though forecasts still are being updated.
“Our focus has been on bringing certain skills and certain capabilities back into the government that had gone out,” says Frank Kendall, principal deputy undersecretary of Defense for acquisition, technology and logistics.
Striking a Balance
As more work comes back in house, CAOs must manage a significant shift in the government’s relationship with contractors. Procurement chiefs will have to demonstrate they are not leaning on the private sector for core work.
In July, OMB asked agencies to identify at least one program that might rely too heavily on contractors and to conduct a pilot human capital analysis of it. The results of the insourcing studies submitted to OMB in late April were mixed.
Education officials identified a number of cases in which contractors were helping prepare for acquisitions, and determined that work should be left to federal employees, Hurwitz says. USAID, meanwhile, has announced plans to insource much of its program design, monitoring and evaluation work. But an EPA review of the workforce inside the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response concluded that a mix of contractors and federal employees was appropriate.
“I am confident that the balance we have right now is pretty good,” Gherardini says. “We have the expertise. We have the people to make sure that the contractors provide us with a good product and that we can analyze it and use it in making final decisions.”
CAOs also are digesting a March OMB proposed policy memorandum that redefined “inherently governmental” tasks that are off-limits for outsourcing. The guidance reiterates officials are to avoid an overreliance on contractors for functions that are “closely associated with inherently governmental” work or that are “critical” for an agency’s mission.
But acquisition managers caution insourcing must be deliberate and thoughtful. Defense’s insourcing plan, for example, has come under criticism from industry groups as quota-driven and lacking sound financial planning. “When people use the word ‘quota’ there is a perception of arbitrariness,” Kendall says. “That’s not our intent. We are trying to bring in specific needs of the government to do specific jobs where they had atrophied too much.”
Hurwitz adds patience will be important. “It won’t be an overnight, ‘Let’s hire people to replace those contractors,’ ” he says. “It’ll be, ‘Let’s just build the workforce in and we’ll reduce the need for the contractors.’ ”
The Obama administration is eager to build up the government’s internal acquisition capability. The White House’s fiscal 2011 budget includes $133 million to boost the size of procurement workforces at civilian agencies by about 5 percent. The plan is to hire predominantly entry-level and midcareer employees from industry for a host of contracting-related positions.
At the Education Department, applications have been pouring in for entry-level contracting positions, but not for slots at the GS-12 level or higher.
“We have to bite the bullet and hire young people that don’t know a lot about contracts and then train them, which is nice because they learn to do it the way we want it done and don’t bring baggage and bad habits,” says Hugh Hurwitz, deputy chief financial officer and senior procurement executive. “But on the other hand they don’t know anything. The workload doesn’t go away… it puts more burden on the staff that is there, but in the end it pays out.”
Hurwitz is taking a hands-on approach to the effort.
“I meet with all new employees,” he says. The meeting is part of an onboarding program that stemmed from discussions with employees at the opposite end of their Education careers.
“Two years ago, we started doing exit interviews, and it was pretty clear from people who were leaving that one of the things they were frustrated about when they came on board was they didn’t know what they were doing and how to do it, and they didn’t have the proper resources,” Hurwitz says. “That obviously had stuck with them.”
The welcome program ensures newcomers have mentors, access to computer system log-ins and other information technology resources, and training and work waiting for them.
“At some agencies they’ll hand you the [Federal Acquisition Regulation] to read because they don’t have any work to give you,” Hurwitz says. “This program ensures you have assignments, you meet the right people, that you get introduced to everybody in the office. It makes for a much smoother transition, makes people feel welcome.”
In addition, it means Education can take advantage of the new hands on deck from the get-go.
“Every agency is screaming that they have more work to do and not enough people to do it,” Hurwitz says. “Then you bring in new people, which is what you’re supposed to be doing, but then you don’t give them work to do or don’t give them tools to do it.”
Hurwitz describes the program as “rudimentary,” but he says it has drawn praise from employees at a range of other agencies.
“What we came up with was kind of basic, but it’s so rarely being done that everyone thinks it’s a great idea,” Hurwitz says. “It has gotten such a good reception that the human capital working group at the [Chief Human Capital Officers Council] got a copy of it and is looking at ways to implement it beyond Ed.”
——————————————————————————–
CHIEF ACQUISITION CHALLENGES
The Government Business Council, the research arm of Government Executive, asked dozens of managers what they wish the chiefs would focus on . . .
Contracting Reform
Managers understand contracting reform mandates, but say conflicting pressures of time, cost and politics are insurmountable obstacles to true reform. Long-term acquisition officials are reform weary and believe attempts at sweeping change actually make them less efficient.
Requirements Definition
An often-cited acquisition criticism is agencies do not do a good job of stating their requirements. Some managers say agencies should be more specific, while others say acquisition officials shouldn’t dismiss products just because they fail to meet excessively detailed requirements.
Managing the Multisector Workforce
The Obama administration is pushing to bring many contractor positions in house, but managers say CHCOs and CAOs must work together to overcome a slow hiring process and other human capital obstacles that exacerbate acquisition challenges.
– By Robert Brodsky and Elizabeth Newell – Government Executive – June 15, 2010
Defense policy bill could affect insourcing efforts
June 28, 2010 by cs
Many federal service contractors could see their jobs brought back in-house if provisions in the House and Senate Defense authorization bills are passed into law, according to an industry group.
The House version of the policy measure includes an amendment sponsored by Rep. John Sarbanes, D-Md., that would give “special consideration” to federal employees for any function that has been performed by a government worker during the past decade, was awarded without competition, is closely associated with an inherently governmental task, or that the private sector has performed poorly during the past five years.
The Sarbanes amendment also would prohibit insourcing quotas unless they were based on research or analysis, ask officials to give consideration to using federal employees for new functions, and require agencies to take inventories of their service contracts to determine which should not be outsourced.
Stan Soloway, president of the Professional Services Council, argued on Monday that the provision creates a preference to use federal employees and lacks a holistic, well-designed sourcing strategy.
“This sends a nonstrategic and unhelpful message to the community,” said Soloway, whose group has criticized the Pentagon’s insourcing policies in recent months. “And, it’s a terribly imbalanced amendment. There seems to be no recognition of the management challenges agencies face and how they should be approaching this.”
But, staffers in Sarbanes’ office called PSC’s complaints “misleading and largely disconnected from the text” of the amendment.
“To be clear, contractors performing these four categories of work will not automatically have their positions converted to federal employee performance,” said Scott MaKeda, a Sarbanes spokesman. “The Sarbanes amendment asks agencies to evaluate whether performance by a contractor is appropriate, at which point the agency can elect to leave the contractor in place, eliminate the position entirely, or convert the position to one filled by a federal employee — a far cry from a ‘preference’ for federal employee hiring.”
The House approved its version of the Defense bill on May 28. The Senate’s bill was reported out of the Armed Services Committee on June 4, but has yet to receive a vote in the full chamber.
Industry officials also were critical of a House-passed amendment that would exclude health care and retirement from any insourcing cost comparisons when contractors contribute less than the Defense Department. Soloway suggested the provision, sponsored by Rep. Tom Perriello, D-Va., “lacks a logical base,” because it does not look at the quality of the benefits or the realities of the health coverage marketplace.
But, Perriello’s office said the provision does not require contractors to provide, change, or increase their health care or retirement benefits.
“The amendment ensures that DoD won’t make insourcing decisions that are biased toward contractors that provide their employees with inferior health care and retirement benefits,” the office said in a statement. “If a bidding contractor does contribute less, then the costs of those benefits are excluded from consideration, and the decision-making process continues.”
The measure is based on a law Congress passed in 2007 that excluded health care and retirement costs from consideration in public-private job competitions.
Federal labor unions said the Perriello amendment would level the playing field for government employees. “Contractors should not be rewarded for contributing less toward employee health care and retirement benefits than the federal government,” said John Gage, president of the American Federation of Government Employees, in a statement earlier this month.
A third insourcing provision, favored by industry groups and sponsored by Rep. James Langevin, D-R.I., would prohibit the Pentagon from establishing “any arbitrary goals or targets to implement DoD’s insourcing initiative.” The measure also requires reports from the Defense Department and the Government Accountability Office on federal insourcing efforts.
The authorization bills also would have major implications for private security contractors.
The House legislation would establish a three-year pilot program at Defense to implement a best value procurement standard for private security contracts in Afghanistan and Iraq. Additional measures would establish a third-party certification process for the operations and business standards of private security contractors. And, private security contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan would have to hire their workers as direct employees rather than independent contractors.
An amendment that made it into the committee-passed Senate version, meanwhile, would allow the secretary of Defense to bar private security contractors that are found responsible for deaths or injuries on the battlefield from winning future contracts. The findings also would be included in the new Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System database.
Other acquisition-related provisions in the House bill would:
- Implement the 2010 IMPROVE Acquisition Act, which overhauls how the Defense Department purchases services and technology;
- Penalize prime contractors that fail to provide information to databases on contracts in Iraq and Afghanistan;
- Make permanent the National Office for Cyberspace and position of federal chief technology officer.
The version awaiting the full Senate’s consideration would:
- Allow Defense to withhold up to 10 percent of certain payments to contractors that are found to have significant deficient in their business systems. The department is considering a similar rule through a change to the Defense Acquisition Regulations System.
- Make permanent the ability of contractors to file protests for task and delivery orders;
- Extend the department’s mentor-protégé program for another five years.
– By Robert Brodsky - GovExec.com - June 21, 2010
Pentagon maps out $100 billion cost savings plan
June 14, 2010 by cs
Defense Secretary Robert Gates is ordering a departmentwide, five-year effort to find more than $100 billion in cost savings in the Pentagon’s budget and redirect that money to pay for military weapons systems and force structure.
In the next several days, Pentagon leaders will direct the military services and defense agencies to scrub their budgets to find $7 billion in savings for the fiscal 2012 budget, Deputy Defense Secretary William Lynn said Friday.
Each of the three services will be responsible for coming up with $2 billion in savings for the fiscal 2012 budget request.
But as a strong incentive, the services will keep within their budgets whatever costs they cut over the next five years to pay their force structure and modernization bills.
The initial cost-savings plans are due by July 31, Lynn said.
After the $7 billion savings in fiscal 2012, the annual cost savings appear to increase significantly to reach a total of $100 billion by fiscal 2012.
The majority of the cost savings — roughly two-thirds — comes from trimming unnecessary overhead, which accounts for about 40 percent of the Defense Department’s total budget.
The other third of the savings will come from cost cuts to force structure and modernization, which the Pentagon began last year when it canceled several weapons programs deemed unnecessary.
The initiative, which Gates first outlined in a May speech in Abilene, Kan., comes at a time of fiscal belt-tightening across the federal government.
The Pentagon, whose base budget has nearly doubled in size since 2001, is now expected to receive only 1 percent real growth in its future budgets. But Gates and Lynn have said the military needs about 2 to 3 percent real growth in its modernization and force structure accounts to maintain the force.
“This [initiative] is not about reducing the topline,” Lynn said. “This is about operating within a constrained topline and trying to get enough resources into that war-fighting” capability.
During his Abilene speech, Gates signaled that his review will look at everything from eliminating unnecessary or duplicative commands to reducing the number of general officers in the military’s ranks.
He also said he wanted to review whether executive or flag-officer billets could be converted to a lower grade to create “a flatter, more effective and less costly organization.” And he said he wanted to look at how many commands or organizations are conducting repetitive or overlapping functions and could be combined or eliminated altogether.
Friday, Lynn acknowledged the challenge ahead for the department.
“History tells you this will be very hard, and I agree with that,” he said.
But he stressed Gates’ track record at making difficult choices, pointing to his success in ending weapons programs like the popular F-22 Raptor fighter jet and the troubled VH-71 presidential helicopter.
– By Megan Scully – CongressDaily – June 4, 2010 - (C) 2010 BY NATIONAL JOURNAL GROUP, INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Pentagon official searches for the source of contracting waste
June 8, 2010 by cs
Frank Kendall arguably has the most difficult job in all of federal acquisition — rooting out the source of entrenched waste in the Defense Department’s $375 billion-per-year contracting system.
It’s an assignment that, over the years, many have undertaken, but few have completed. In his first interview since being confirmed in March as principal deputy undersecretary of Defense for acquisition, technology and logistics, Kendall told Government Executive that he plans to approach the mission from a different perspective — a ground-up strategy examining the root causes of waste and inefficiency.
“I have been around this business for about 40 years and have been through every cycle of acquisition reform at least once or twice,” Kendall said. “But, I don’t know that we have really gotten at the built-in incentives to optimism that exist in our system or gotten at what we are really paying for with our somewhat unrealistic projections about schedule, technology or cost.”
As the department’s second-highest ranking politically appointed acquisition official, Kendall has assembled a team of people from Pentagon headquarters and the various service agencies to decipher and measure the sources of acquisition waste.
But the examination is more than a simple process-oriented review to eliminate system redundancy or streams of paperwork. Kendall wants to reform the behavior and incentives that lead to cost inefficiencies, some of which are deeply engrained in the Defense acquisition process.
“DoD is in the business of doing programs and we have been a factory for programs for many years,” he said. “But we still don’t have the process of doing programs well understood and well under control.”
For example, Defense has a tendency to sign on to the next latest and greatest technological advance, no matter if the program is necessary, ready or affordable, he said. Budget operators and service leaders, meanwhile, want to spend as little as possible for weapons systems, but then impose unrealistic schedules on contractors. And companies place bids on contracts that are overly optimistic, hoping they will recoup costs further downstream, according to Kendall.
“I am hopeful that once we understand what those behaviors are costing us in terms of inefficiency then it will be easier to change them,” he said. “That is a hypothesis that has yet to be proved.”
Reforming the acquisition system of the largest single buyer of goods and services on the planet will not be easy. Interest groups scattered throughout the Pentagon advocate passionately for pet projects. Congress is deeply invested in keeping Defense projects — and the jobs associated with them — in their backyard, an all-too familiar scenario that most recently has played out with the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.
“There is a certain amount of institutional inertia that needs to be overcome,” Kendall said.
The West Point alumnus has seen the Defense system from all angles. He spent a decade on active duty in the Army and later held various departmental jobs, including director of tactical warfare programs. Kendall has served as a consultant to industry and nonprofit research firms and was vice president of engineering at Raytheon, one of the largest Pentagon contractors. Most recently, he was a managing partner at Renaissance Strategic Advisors, a Virginia aerospace and defense sector consulting firm.
Kendall returns to Defense at a time of intense transition. The Pentagon has cut several big-ticket programs, addressed significant reforms to its weapons procurement system and begun the process of building up its in-house skill sets, particularly in the fields of engineering, program management and acquisition.
Last year, Defense Secretary Robert Gates announced he would reduce the percentage of support service contractors from its current level of 39 percent of the workforce to its pre-2001 level of 26 percent. The Pentagon will replace those contractors during the next five years with 39,000 new full-time government employees, 20,000 of whom would be acquisition professionals, although the latter figure could grow, Kendall said.
The additions to the Pentagon acquisition workforce would be split roughly between 10,000 insourcing conversions and 10,000 new hires. As of the end of March, the department has hired approximately 4,800 new employees, nearly two-thirds through insourcing, according to Defense spokeswoman Cheryl Irwin.
Industry officials have criticized the insourcing initiative as “quota driven,” arguing routine commercial activities are being moved in-house without any verifiable cost savings. But Kendall claims those concerns are off target and miss the big picture.
“Our focus has been on bringing certain skills and certain capabilities back into the government that had gone out,” he said. “We are less concerned about cost comparisons.”
And while the department and the various service agencies have set specific insourcing targets through discussions with their buying commands, Kendall said the process is being conducted carefully and deliberately. “When people use the word ‘quota’ there is a perception of arbitrariness,” he said. “That is not our intent. We are trying to bring in specific needs of the government to do jobs where they atrophied too much. … We are not measuring performance in terms of pure numbers. We want quality and we want the right kinds of people brought in to do the work that needs to get done.”
– By Robert Brodsky - GovExec.com - June 2, 2010
Pentagon procurement officer describes overhaul in contracting
June 4, 2010 by cs
Edward M. Harrington deals with big bucks.
More than $132 billion annually, in fact. As the Pentagon’s deputy assistant secretary for procurement, he helps oversee how the Army spends every dollar, buying a range of items and services: from complex computer software to run electronics programs, to setting dining tents for soldiers in deserts, to buying armored tanks, ammunition and weapons from contractors.
The government’s contracting out for services is nothing new, as Harrington’s office notes. Its “Contractors on the Battlefield” chart outlines the number of contractors compared with the number of soldiers since the American Revolution. Back then, the ratio of contractors to soldiers was 1:6. World War I, 1:20. Vietnam, 1:6. Gulf War, 1:60. Iraq, 1:1. Afghanistan, 2:1.
These days, Harrington points out, the job is tougher because the government’s workforce to write, manage and oversee the contractors has shrunk dramatically. The office estimates that as the workload has increased 1,000 percent since 1987, the government’s contracting workforce has decreased by 25 percent.
Harrington, in excerpts from an interview, discusses his responsibility of helping to execute the Obama administration’s strategy of overhauling how the federal government handles contracting.
You oversee a big chunk of change. What’s the hardest thing about that?
The biggest challenge we have is restoring the contracting workforce. Building both the numbers of the workforce back as well as advancing their skills. As the contracting dollars have gone up, the government’s contracting workforce has gone down. That left us with a relatively minimal staff of senior contracting experts.
Where have they gone?
We’ve offered them buyouts and they took them.
Give an example of how the workforce has been cut.
In my own office, we had 142 personnel — 11 of them were the most experienced contracting experts in the Army. Of those 11, each had about 25 to 35 years of experience. They were very expert at interpreting the needs, developing policy and overseeing contracts. Right now, we’ve been able to bring one of those individuals back.
Why is having mid- and senior-level people such a big deal?
Contracting is a practice, a profession. It is similar to law or engineering, where you develop your expertise and skills over a number of years. . . . It takes time to get the training as well as to get the experience with all of the various contracting regulations. Those mid- and senior-level individuals are essential to coaching, counseling and mentoring our entry-level people coming onboard.
Has contracting become more complex, or is it that you’ve lost the personnel to do what you need to do?
It is a combination of both. It has become more complex because we have rules, regulations and policies that have emerged over time — all focused on getting . . . the better business arrangement with our contractors — while at the same time, we’ve had 15 years of downsizing, and now we’re trying to rebuild those numbers.
What are you doing to improve how contracting is done in Iraq and Afghanistan?
We have had more in-depth assessment of where we need contracting representatives. We are now training them in the United States and then providing them in theater. Previously, it would take us three to four days to transfer from one contracting officer representative leaving the country and transferring back to the United States. Now it takes two hours to get that person prepped.
Are waste, fraud and abuse as widespread as some observers think?
No, I don’t think so. We do regular ethics training with our contracting workforce. We focus on procurement integrity and ensuring that we have no undue influence on the process or the people in the process. Are we absolutely perfect? No. It is a matter of daily oversight on our part.
President Obama has also pushed for doing more insourcing of some of the jobs that are now contracted out to companies. What are you doing on that front?
We have a five-year plan to insource a lot of our contracting manpower. We’ll add about 4,100 people to our acquisition workforce.
What kinds of jobs will that include?
It will be from engineers, to testers, to cost analyzers, to quality assurance personnel — many of whom are currently contractors.
Where are you in that five-year plan?
For this fiscal year, we were supposed to insource 1,414 positions. Of those, we have done 454. We’ve also hired 500 contracting interns who spend two years in a training program and come out as a contracting officer.
Is it easier to find people in this down economy?
We have many more applications than positions. In one case, we’ve had 3,000 applicants for 50 contracting positions. . . . We’ve had people who are interested in coming to us from the auto industry, and they’re a good fit because they have experience as purchasing agents.
Is that a reflection of the economy?
Yes, I think so, and the opportunity that presents itself in this career field. There’s tremendous opportunity to grow. We have a career path, and it is a good, steady job.
___________________________
– By Dana Hedgpeth – Washington Post – Tuesday, June 1, 2010; B03
Pentagon reports progress on anniversary of procurement reform law
May 31, 2010 by cs
In the year since President Obama signed the Weapons System Acquisition Reform Act into law, the Defense Department has made significant strides in gaining control over the cost and development of its procurement programs, Pentagon officials testified on Wednesday.
Many of the changes have focused on the front end of the acquisition process, according to Nancy Spruill, director of acquisition resources and analysis in the Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics.
“The department is committed to making trade-offs among cost, schedule and performance to significantly reduce cost growth in major defense acquisition programs,” Spruill told the House Oversight and Government Reform Subcommittee on National Security and Foreign Affairs.
The law, which legislators have described as the most significant change to the Pentagon’s purchasing system in two decades, addressed the ballooning cost of Defense weapons system acquisitions. For example, it includes a provision that presumes any weapon program that exceeds its original costs by more than 25 percent will be terminated. If the program is not canceled, then it must be restructured and reviewed again.
To reduce the risk of cost overruns, additional reviews will be conducted early in the process, scrutinizing the schedule, cost limitations and technological maturity of major weapon programs, Spruill said. The department also has increased the size and capabilities of its cost estimating staff and is using contract fee structures that are better tied to delivered accomplishments, she said.
“We believe these steps will result in more thoughtfully structured programs that reinforce our stated preference for an evolutionary acquisition approach,” Spruill said.
A key federal watchdog, however, said Defense’s acquisition improvements were a mixed bag.
In March, the Government Accountability Office examined 42 major weapon programs and found progress in the technology, design and manufacturing knowledge at key points in the acquisition process. But, the report also found some weaknesses. A majority of the programs experienced substantial requirements changes, software development challenges or workforce issues, investigators said.
“Most programs are still proceeding with less knowledge than best practices suggest, putting them at higher risk for cost growth and schedule delays,” Mike Sullivan, director of acquisition and sourcing management at GAO, told the subcommittee.
GAO’s findings disappointed lawmakers. “DoD has still not fully implemented a ‘knowledge-based approach’ to its weapons acquisitions program,” said Rep. John Tierney, D-Mass., chairman of the subcommittee. “It boils down to the need for the department to take some common-sense steps in its processes.”
While Defense has made steep cuts to some of its weapon systems, its portfolio of major acquisition programs still is growing, from 96 in December 2007 to 102 in July 2009, according to GAO.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates recently proposed ending all or part of at least six major defense acquisition programs that are over cost, behind schedule or no longer meet the department’s needs.
Pentagon officials also reported progress in increasing the department’s acquisition workforce and insourcing functions currently being performed by contractors. During the next five years, Defense plans to hire 9,000 more civilian employees and convert 11,000 contract positions to government jobs.
By the end of March, Defense had brought on 3,200 new acquisition employees, said John Roth, the Pentagon’s deputy comptroller for program and budget. Hiring projections for the rest of fiscal 2010, which ends on Sept. 30, remain on target to meet the department’s needs, he said.
– By Robert Brodsky – May 19, 2010 – (C) 2010 BY NATIONAL JOURNAL GROUP, INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Three upcoming events offer excellent opportunities for marketing to government
May 24, 2010 by cs
Major military commands are hosting vendor events in Georgia over the next few months.
Want to learn how to do business with the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA), the Department of Defense’s largest combat support agency? Then make plans to be in Savannah on June 15 & 16.
How about business with the Marine Corps Logistics Command? Albany, GA is the place to be on August 12, 2010.
Interested in contracting with the Army? Then Columbus, GA is the place to be Sept. 13 through 16.
For complete details — including registration — on each of these marketing opportunities, use these links:
- Defense Logistics Agency 2-Day Regional Meeting – June 15 & 16 – Savannah, GA
- Marine Corps Logistics Command 2010 Small Business Trade Show – August 12 – Albany, GA
- Annual U.S. Army Infantry Warfighting Conference’s Vendor Showcase - Sept. 14 and 15 – Columbus, GA
Preparation is key for effective marketing at events like these. If you need help or suggestions, read our article on this subject and feel free to contact your nearest GTPAC Counselor.
© 2010 Georgia Tech Procurement Assistance Center – All Rights Reserved.