Georgia Tech Procurement Assistance Center

Procurement reform is one of 3 tech trends predicted for 2014

By

[Note: This article was written by Steve Towns, executive editor of Governing magazine.]

Nobel Prize-winning physicist Niels Bohr famously said, “Prediction is very difficult, especially if it’s about the future.” I tend to agree with him, but as we enter the New Year there are three interrelated technology issues that we can’t ignore. They’ll demand more attention from state and local leaders in 2014.

1. Data Analytics – Governments are great at collecting information, but they often do a lousy job of using it effectively.

2. Civic Innovation – While governments are struggling to get a handle on analytics, many have done a good job of opening data for public consumption.

3. Procurement Reform – One of the biggest barriers to harnessing the growing momentum around civic technology is government procurement.

Keep reading this article at: http://www.governing.com/columns/tech-talk/gov-government-technology-trends-to-watch-in-2014.html

DoD acquisition staff back to work, they just can’t buy anything

By

The Pentagon has recalled 90 percent of the 350,000 civilians furloughed last week, including acquisition, contracts and logistics personnel.

But, as Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel made clear in his recall memo, due to the fact that the Pentagon doesn’t currently have an appropriations bill, those folks don’t have any money to buy stuff.

The Pentagon brought back most of the furloughed civilians based on an interpretation of the quickly written Pay Our Military Act, signed by President Obama on Sept. 30. The law says furloughs don’t apply to civilian employees whose responsibilities contribute to the morale, well-being, capabilities and readiness of service members.

Keep reading this article at: http://www.defenseone.com/management/2013/10/dod-acquisitions-staff-back-work-they-just-cant-buy-anything/71483

Federal Acquisition Regulation is the subject of 4-day Georgia Tech course beginning Aug. 6th

By

The Contracting Education Academy at Georgia Tech (The Academy) kicks-off a four-day course on Tuesday, August 6, 2013 covering the fundamentals of using the Federal Acquisition Regulation FAR).

The course is being conducted at Georgia Tech’s world-class professional education facilities in the Global Learning Center located on campus in midtown Atlanta.

This contracting overview of the FAR, covers Module 1 of CON 090: Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Fundamentals, and includes the identification of the basic principles of contracting by the federal government, identification of and access to on-line resources, and instruction on the location, citation, and interpretation of the FAR, the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS), and the DFARS’ Procedures, Guidance and Information (PGI).

This course was originally designed exclusively for federal contracting officers, but The Academy has expanded its scope so that it is relevant to multiple audiences, including  contractors seeking to learn more about the federal contracting process, federal officials who need to satisfy job-related continuous education requirements, and anyone seeking more information about the federal acquisition profession.

More information about this course is available at: http://www.pe.gatech.edu/courses/con-090-1-contracting-overview-far.

In all, there are four Modules that make-up the CON 090 course series.  Information about the entire series can be found at: http://www.pe.gatech.edu/courses/con-090-federal-acquisition-regulation-far-fundamentals.

The Academy’s complete list of government acquisition courses, and course scheduling, is at: http://contractingacademy.gatech.edu/training.

The Contracting Education Academy at Georgia Tech is an official equivalency training provider of the Defense Acquisition University (DAU).

DOD needs simpler contracting processes, lawmakers told

By

Congress and the Defense Department need to simplify the department’s confusing and burdensome acquisition regulations in order to make the jobs of the acquisition workforce and contractors easier, the House Armed Services Committee recommended in a new report.

In one recommendation, the report says DOD and Congress should embark on a comprehensive review of laws and regulations related to procurement. They then should attempt to amend or even repeal outdated regulations. In doing so, officials should consider whether a rule has had unintended consequences that outweigh its original purpose.

“This effort should be undertaken with an eye to simplifying and streamlining all aspects of the acquisition process and reducing the negative cost and schedule impacts,” according to the report released March 20.

The House committee’s Panel on Business Challenges Within the Defense Industry released the report after discussing acquisition issues with more than 150 people from government, industry, think tanks and academia.

The panel learned in those discussions that the acquisition rules are constantly changing and are extremely complicated. The result is unnecessary complexity, confusion, and poor execution, which only furthers challenges for the acquisition workforce, according to the report.

The Office of Management and Budget urged agencies on March 20 to take similar steps in an effort to avoid duplication among regulations. It even urged agency officials to talk to contractors and other experts before they issue a proposed rule.

DOD’s acquisition rules are off-putting to some companies, the panel wrote in its report.

“The plethora of regulations specific to government and defense contracting dissuades many companies from competing for government contracts,” the panel found.

The complexities also make it tough for the department’s acquisition workforce, which is going through a slow rebuilding process. Employees need a lot of training to understand the ins and outs of the acquisitions regulations and manage complex procurements, the panel wrote.

The workforce took a hit in the 1990s with a major reduction in its numbers. Nowadays, defense officials are attempting to rebuild it. They have hired a lot of new employees, dubbed by the panel as a “new-hire bulge.” Meanwhile many senior members are eligible for retirement.

“These parallel bulges constitute a ‘bathtub effect’ as mid-career personnel are not abundant enough to adequately replace the retirement bulge, nor provide for enough on-hands mentorship to the new-hire bulge,” the panel wrote.

DOD’s training now is very important, the panel added. Maturity in the job and higher education are keys to a strong workforce. It’s more than numbers.

Higher education equips acquisition workers with complex skill sets in finance, systems engineering, logistics, and operations management needed to administer large contracts and manage long-term technology projects.

In President Barack Obama’s fiscal 2013 budget proposal, DOD requested $374 million in its acquisition workforce development fund for recruiting and hiring acquisition and only $120 million, or less than a third, for training and development of the workforce, the panel points out.

“Just as it takes many years to develop a military leader capable of commanding at the senior ranks of the operational force, it takes a similar amount of time to develop an acquisition professional with the knowledge, skills, and experience needed to manage large defense acquisition efforts,” the panel wrote.

About the Author: Matthew Weigelt is a senior writer covering acquisition and procurement for Federal Computer Week.  This article appeared Mar. 22, 2012 at http://washingtontechnology.com/articles/2012/03/22/regulatory-reform-dod-acquisition.aspx?s=wtdaily_230312.

Learn ‘soup to nuts’ of government contracting November 7-18

By

Serious about learning everything about government contracting?  Interested in learning about contracting from a federal contracting officer’s point-of-view?  Looking for an opportunity to learn government contracting in a comprehensive and interactive way?

If you answered “yes” to these three questions, then “Mission-Focused Contracting” —  a two-week course offered by The Contracting Education Academy at Georgia Tech — is the place to be.

This very comprehensive course is being offered on the Georgia Tech campus over a two-week period, November 7 through 18, 2011.   (Please note that there will be no class on Friday, November 11 in observance of Veterans’ Day.)

Mission-Focused Contracting is the capstone course for Level I contracting professionals and all non-contracting personnel who play a role in the acquisition process.  This class is applicable to both government and industry purchasing and engages participants in the entire government acquisition process, from meeting with the government customer to completing the contract close-out process. Throughout this course, participants have the opportunity to learn and apply problem-solving and negotiation skills.

The Contracting Education Academy at Georgia Tech (The Academy) is an approved equivalency training provider to the Defense Acquisition University (DAU) and provides continuing education training to acquisition and government contracting professionals as well as to business professionals working for government contractors or pursuing opportunities in federal contracting.

How You Will Benefit:

By attending this course, participants will learn how to:

  • Complete market research to identify procurement sources
  • Develop a bid or proposal package
  • Evaluate proposals and award contracts
  • Monitor contractor performance, apply remedies, and make proper contract payments
  • Modify contracts, exercise options, and complete the contract closeout process

Business people taking this course have the unprecedented opportunity to sit side-by-side with government contracting personnel to learn the ins and outs of federal contracting.  In addition, many of the principles of federal contracting apply to state and local government procurement.

To learn more about this course — and to register– please visit: http://www.pe.gatech.edu/courses/con-120-mission-focused-contracting.

New GSA acquisition chief calls for government-contractor cooperation

By

The General Services Administration’s new acquisition chief is calling for greater cooperation and communication between the government and its industry contractors, echoing a familiar refrain from members of the Obama administration’s procurement team in recent months.

In an interview last week with Government Executive, new GSA Chief Acquisition Officer Mindy Connolly said the two sides should have better dialogue in the lead-up to contract awards and during the process of implementing Federal Acquisition Regulations. GSA, like all contracting agencies, is required to develop a vendor communication plan for its workforce and the public by June 30.

“If we want to have a government that is leaner and more transparent and ready for the 21st century, anything we can do to reduce that burden on industry is really to our advantage,” said Connolly, whose first day on the job at GSA was Feb. 28.

The administration has made it a priority of late to myth-bust the perception that contracting officers should not meet with vendors for fear of causing contract delays, or committing potential ethical violations.

Last month, Dan Gordon, administrator of federal procurement policy at the Office of Management and Budget issued a 13-page memorandum that addresses 10 of the most widely held misconceptions, including communicating with a bidder could result in a competing firm filing a protest.

Connolly has experienced the often arcane world of federal contracting from two perspectives, administering awards in both the public and private sectors. She has awarded contracts at NASA, Customs and Borders Protection, and the Treasury Department and was the Transportation Security Agency’s first contracting officer. She previously served as chief of contracting for Bureau of Land Management’s Western Region and held similar roles in industry, most notably as a contracting manager for Honeywell Defense and Space Electronics.

At GSA, Connolly plans to work with industry to clarify the impact of FAR rules so that industry is not left struggling for answers.

“Because of my experience both in government acquisition and in industry acquisition as the government customer, my interest is that it works better,” she said. “It works pretty well, but there are opportunities for it to work better through communications and doing a little different planning in our rule-making.”

Most recently, Connolly served as a senior procurement policy analyst at OFPP, where she led the office’s natural resources’ division on contracting policy matters, including implementing White House requirements for sustainable procurements and green building design.

She helped draft Obama’s October 2009 executive order requiring agencies to set a 2020 greenhouse gas emissions reduction target, increase energy efficiency, reduce fleet petroleum consumption, and “leverage federal purchasing power to promote environmentally responsible products and technologies.”

The order states 95 percent of all new nonweapons contracts meet sustainability requirements, including being water and energy-efficient and safe for the environment, and containing recycled materials.

Connolly’s job is to take the broad-ranging policy for environmentally preferable products and services and sustainable technologies and make it executable through regulations in the FAR.

“Each agency would be able to look at how they can put [directives] into their specifications, or requirements for products,” she explained. “Some things are easy, like office paper. Other things are more challenging like a building, or a lease.”

— By Robert Brodsky – GovExec.com – March 14, 2011

Army skeptical of fixed-price contracts

By

The Obama administration might be embracing fixed-priced contracts as the preferred method for purchasing goods and services from the private sector, but that strategy is not necessarily being implemented by the Army.

During a speech on Wednesday to service contractors, Malcolm O’Neill, assistant Army secretary for acquisition, logistics and technology, offered a surprisingly frank critique of fixed-price contracts.

“There is risk when you take something fixed-price,” O’Neill told members of the Professional Services Council, an industry trade association. “But my experience has been that when you offer a fixed-price bid, it’s 10 percent to 15 percent more than you need.”

O’Neill’s office often has argued against using fixed-price awards because of the belief that contractors build a cushion into their bids to compensate for the potential risks that occur during the length of a contract.

The Army wants the contractor to share the risk using more cost-plus, incentive-based contracts in which the vendor is rewarded for coming in ahead of schedule and potentially punished, through the loss of award fees, for delays. Cost-type contracts also can be more easily modified if the government’s requirements change, O’Neill said.

The Obama administration has repeatedly classified cost-plus contracts as “high risk,” lumping them in with time-and-materials contracts and sole-source awards. The Office of Federal Procurement Policy has encouraged agencies to cut by 10 percent their use of each of the three contract types.

Recent data, however, suggest that agencies’ use of cost-plus contracts actually has gone up. While agencies have cut their spending on time-and-materials contracts — considered the highest risk to taxpayers because of the potential for escalating costs — most of those contracts were converted to cost-reimbursement vehicles rather than fixed-price contracts, OFPP Administrator Daniel Gordon said last month.

O’Neill said he has received no direction from the Pentagon or the White House to use fixed-price contracting when he thinks it’s inappropriate. In some instances, he has counseled against fixed-price contracts because the Army’s estimated costs were 20 percent less than the lowest offer. He described the dichotomy as “should cost versus would cost.”

In a brief presentation, O’Neill stressed the principles of the Defense Department’s ongoing efficiency initiative to save money through reducing overhead costs, improving business practices — including more contract competition — and eliminating troubled programs.

“We have every reason to do our jobs better,” O’Neill said. “If I can do the job of 10 people with eight people, that makes me feel good.”

The funds saved from the efficiency initiative will largely be reinvested in the warfighter, Defense officials have said. The ultimate goal is a 2 percent-to-3 percent net annual growth in warfighting capability without a commensurate budget increase.

O’Neill said contractors will play a critical role in helping reach that goal. “You have got to play shortstop on our team,” he said.

The Army, for its part, recently completed a study that looked at contract requirements, overall funding and acquisition policies. The resulting plan, which eventually will be made public, now is being reviewed by Pentagon leadership.

— by Robert Brodsky – GovExec.com –  March 9, 2011

Senior acquisition officials question procurement policy direction

By

Senior federal acquisition officials do not believe that many of the signature procurement policy changes the Obama administration and the Democratic Congress have implemented in recent years are adding significant value to the government’s mission, according to a new report from a pair of industry groups.

The biennial survey by the Professional Services Council, a contractor trade association, and Grant Thornton LLP, a business advisory firm, interviewed 33 officials from across government, including senior acquisition executives, congressional staff and oversight employees, on a host of topics.

On many key issues there appears to be a widening chasm between operational and oversight officials, but they generally concurred that the implementation of major policies and rules — from the insourcing of private sector functions to the push to use fixed-price contracts — were failing to meet their stated objectives.

“The idea of showing contract savings is nothing more than an accounting exercise,” said one interviewee. “When you have policy that doesn’t make sense to subject matter experts, you lose credibility,” another said. All the quotes were provided anonymously, although the officials interviewed were identified at the end of the report.

Stan Soloway, president of PSC, suggested that many senior acquisition officials supported the administration’s overall policy direction, but felt “neutered” by a one-size-fits-all execution approach.

For example, recent legislative and regulatory actions have shown a preference for fixed-price contracts above cost-plus or time-and-materials awards. In many cases, officials are required to provide lengthy written explanations when using the latter contract types. But the survey showed that 71 percent of respondents felt the fixed-price mandates had not resulted in better contract outcomes for the government or the taxpayer.

A similar disconnect between a policy’s intention and result was found in response to questions about insourcing. Many officials argued the concept, while necessary to restore core government capabilities, has not been conducted thoughtfully or strategically and might be moving too rapidly. Meanwhile, a whopping 94 percent of respondents said insourcing will hurt small businesses.

“Insourcing is moving too quickly and it is too focused on hitting metrics,” one interviewee said. “The administration is proceeding without a larger view of how the government does business. The decision should be strategic and not rushed.”

The redefinition of inherently governmental activities, one of the key procurement regulatory changes the Obama administration has embraced, also failed to impress senior acquisition officials.

Two-thirds of all interviewees said the March guidance from the Office of Management and Budget was not clear or actionable. As was the case with several policy proposals, many cited the lack of resources needed to implement the guidance.

The survey also revealed palpable frustration among acquisition and oversight leaders regarding implementation of the Recovery Act. Two-thirds of all respondents felt they were not provided adequate resources to comply with stimulus rules and that reporting requirements were neither manageable nor sustainable. Congress, however, has shown some support for implementing Recovery Act-type requirements for all procurements.

Retired Vice Adm. Lou Crenshaw, a principal at Grant Thornton, suggested that too much focus has been placed on regulatory compliance rather than operational outcomes. “This is rocket science,” Crenshaw said. “It’s a complicated process.”

As in previous surveys, enhancing, training and managing the acquisition workforce remain the biggest operational challenges in acquisition, respondents said. They noted that while the addition of direct hiring authority at some agencies has helped to a point, constant turnover, insufficient training and a reliance on interns have created functional concerns. Acquisition officials suggested the system might be improving, but oversight officials generally were more skeptical.

Contract administrators also appeared to be struggling under the weight of oversight mandates. Nearly 90 percent of those surveyed agreed more resources were devoted to back-end oversight than front-end contract management. Others suggested overly burdensome oversight was inhibiting innovation while stressing rigidity and a focus on lowest cost.

“Resources are absolutely not in balance,” one interviewee said. “They have thrown resources at [inspectors general] and auditors, but they have done nothing to facilitate contract administration.”

The divide was evident in other areas. More than 70 percent of operational executives said existing structures designed to prevent organizational conflicts of interest function effectively. Sixty percent of oversight professionals disagreed. The two sides also disagreed on the need to reform personal conflict-of-interest rules, with operational officials generally in favor of maintaining the existing structure.

While the report did not take sides on the respective issues, it did recommend improving the communication and collaboration between the oversight and operational communities, backing up policy directives with sufficient resources, and avoiding one-size-fits-all mandates.

— By Robert Brodsky – GovernmentExecutive.com –  November 15, 2010

Government contracting developments worth watching

By

There are several new developments in the government contracting arena which will have an effect on how you do business with federal, state and local agencies in the future. 

New rules soon will affect woman-owned and small disadvantaged-owned businesses; more transparency is being called for in both monitoring functions and contract award decision-making; a sharper focus is being given to federal contract awards to small businesses;  federal contract spending is predicted to drop; and government acquisitions are “going green.” 

To help you track these developing trends, the Georgia Tech Procurement Assistance Center (GTPAC) presents this quick reference guide:

  • The National Association of Women Business Owners (NAWBO) recently submit comments on the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA)’s proposed rule for the Women’s Procurement Program on behalf of its members.  You can find NAWBO’s views here, read the Small Business Administration’s summary of the Mar. 2, 2010 proposed rule here, and read the full text of the proposed rules here.  On July 28, 2010, the head of the SBA told the House Small Business Committee that the women’s small business contracting program will start before the end of 2010; details here.
  • There are new rules also being proposed for changes in the U.S. Department of Transportation’s disadvantaged business enterprise (DBE) program; an article containing details can be seen here. 
  • Increased calls for transparency, from both within and outside of government, are getting attention.   Pointing to the absence of a centralized federal database listing instances of contracting misconduct, the Project On Government Oversight (POGO) is now compiling and providing such data on its own.  You can find sortable details here.    In addition, the Sunlight Foundation combines data from the Federal Procurement Data System and the Federal Assistance Award Data System to create a free, searchable database of federal government contracting and spending, which you can access here.  Meanwhile,  the General Services Administration (GSA) and federal acquisition councils are seeking advice from the public on how best to publish contract information; details here.
  • In recent weeks, the volume has been turned up on the federal government’s contract spending with small businesses.  While it’s the government’s policy to award 23% of its contracts to small businesses, numerous reports show that not only has this goal been missed  but that large businesses — misclassified as small businesses — are receiving these set-asides.  A recent news article by the president of the American Small Business League summarizes this problem.  The Government Accountability Office (GAO) documents ineligible firms receiving government contracts designated for service disabled veteran owned small businesses here, and ineligible firms receiving contracts set-aside for small disadvantaged 8(a) firms here.  The White House, meanwhile, recently called for the establishment of a pair of interagency task forces to help federal agencies award more contracts to small businesses; details here.
  • The president’s proposed FY2011 budget includes $36 billion fewer federal contracting dollars.  This is about a 5% cut over the current year ending Sept. 30, 2010.  The new budget reflects a freeze on discretionary spending as well as an “insourcing” initiative, meaning fewer contractors and more government workers.  Read an article about an analysis of the proposed federal contracting budget here.  See details on how insourcing could hurt small businesses here.
  • More and more attention is being given to contractor performance as a factor in contract award decisions.  Click on the hyperlinks here to read articles about the Navy’s proposed “preferred contractor program” and the establishment of the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS) which took effect on April 22, 2010.  You also can read about a bi-partisan effort in the Senate that could double the length of time contractors’ performance records remain active in government databases.
  • Energy efficiency and savings, green construction, green technology and smarter acquisition decisions — all continue to be emphasized in current government contracting.  Recent articles about each of these topics  here.

Keep watching www.gtpac.org to see reporting on the latest developments in all aspects of government contracting.

© 2010 Georgia Tech Procurement Assistance Center – All Rights Reserved.

Administration cites progress reining in procurement costs

By

After nearly a decade of unsustainable growth, the federal government finally has hit the brakes on contract spending, the Obama administration’s top procurement official testified on Thursday.

Between fiscal 2000 and fiscal 2008, federal contract spending increased by an annual rate of 12 percent, according to Daniel Gordon, administrator of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy at the Office of Management and Budget.

But, between fiscal 2008 and fiscal 2009 — which included more than eight months of the Obama presidency — the growth rate slowed to 4 percent, with spending increasing from $537 billion to $560 billion, Gordon told the Senate Budget Committee’s Task Force on Government Performance.

“I can’t tell you today that we have solved all of the problems. Far from it,” Gordon said. “It took years to dig the hole we are in. And, we cannot dig ourselves out of it in a few short months. But I can tell you we have made real, measurable progress.”

Gordon highlighted OMB data that shows during the first two quarters of fiscal 2010, agencies decreased their reliance on sole-source contracts, as well as cost-reimbursement and time-and-materials contracts, compared with the same period the previous year.

That data, however, covers only newly issued contracts and it does not include orders on multiple-award contracts or modifications of existing contracts, which accounted for more than half the total spending during that period.

Agencies, Gordon said, also are pooling their purchases and making better use of strategic sourcing. He cited recent blanket purchasing agreements by the General Services Administration for office supplies and the Homeland Security Department for desktop operating systems, e-mail and office automation.

OMB is working with other civilian agencies to identify opportunities for strategic sourcing, particularly in information technology and medical and surgical supply purchases, he said.

In addition, later this summer, GSA will launch a knowledge management portal where studies, market research and spending analyses connected with governmentwide and agencywide strategic sourcing initiatives will be posted.

The Defense Department, meanwhile, announced plans last month to save more than $100 billion during the next five fiscal years through more cost-effective procurements and by identifying unproductive or low value-added overhead expenses.

Shay Assad, director of defense procurement and acquisition policy, said the department also is phasing out time-and-materials contracts, increasing the participation of small businesses, and improving competitive procedures.

Defense also will scrutinize the proliferation of multiple-award indefinite quantity-indefinite delivery contracts to examine whether they have yielded adequate competition, he said. Primarily, the reform effort will look prospectively at new contracts, rather than altering existing awards. “We need to examine not only what we are acquiring, but also how we are acquiring these activities and programs,” Assad testified.

Both Assad and Gordon noted contracting reform efforts all are tied to building up the size, strength and capability of the acquisition workforce. Defense plans to add about 20,000 employees within the next five years and is currently ahead of its expected pace. To date, Assad said, the department has added about 4,800 staffers.

Obama’s fiscal 2011 budget proposal requested that Congress appropriate $158 million for the civilian agencies’ acquisition workforce. The funding, Gordon said, would enable agencies to increase the size of their acquisition staffs by 5 percent and to invest in more training and technology.

“This is a relatively small investment that will have a high return,” he noted. 

— by Robert Brodsky – GovExec.com – July 15, 2010

Contracting News

Read More

Contracting Tips

Read More

GTPAC News

Read More

Georgia Tech News

Read More