Georgia Tech Procurement Assistance Center

Transparency in debriefs would improve competition, help small businesses

By

Taxpayers have the right to know how the government is spending their money.

After all, the insights gained from total transparency in the federal procurement process can hold agencies more accountable. For this reason, administrations and congresses have undertaken initiatives to boost transparency and improve oversight of federal government spending on a bipartisan basis.

A few efforts stand out, such as the Clean Contracting Act, USAspending.gov and the DATA Act, but outside of these select few, transparency is still lacking under Federal Acquisition Regulation Part 16 Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity task or delivery order awards. To fix this, it is time that federal agencies be required to provide post-award debriefings to all unsuccessful offerors, regardless of the value of the awarded IDIQ task or delivery order.

Keep reading this article at: https://washingtontechnology.com/articles/2019/01/02/insights-bunting-contract-transparency.aspx

DATA Act: so far, so meh

By

If laws produced virtue, we’d all have halos.  In reality laws sometimes produce next to nothing, at least initially.

Case in point: the 2014 Digital Accountability and Transparency Act. That well-intentioned piece of legislation was supposed to bring transparency by having agencies adopt uniform standards for tagging spending data. But as implemented, it’s not working out that way.

Those pesky Government Accountability Office auditors checked out the data posted at USAspending.gov. Under the law, GAO is supposed to check things periodically. When it comes to budget data, agencies get about a “C.” GAO is 95 percent confident that three-quarters of the website data matches agency records. But on contracts and grants spending, forget about it. GAO found that between 0 and 1 percent of posted data matches agency records.

Keep reading this article at: https://federalnewsradio.com/tom-temin-commentary/2017/11/data-act-so-far-so-meh/

       

Georgia ranked near bottom for public access to state expenditure info

By

Georgia is given a score of “C” — based on a numerical score of 74 out of 100 — earning a ranking of 42rd among state governments for providing public access to spending information, according to a report issued by the U.S. Public Interest Research Group (PIRG) Education Fund.  PIRG is a 501(c)(3) organization promotes good government.

Government spending transparency is improving, but many states still lag far behind, according to “Following the Money 2016: How the 50 States Rate in Providing Online Access to Government Spending Data,” the sixth annual report of its kind by the U.S. Public Interest Research Group Education Fund. Some states have improved their spending transparency web portals significantly, earning perfect scores in this year’s report, while others are still barely achieving the minimum standards.

State governments spend hundreds of billions of dollars each year through contracts for goods and services, subsidies to encourage economic development, and other expenditures. Public accountability helps ensure that state funds are spent as wisely as possible.

State-operated spending transparency websites provide checkbook-level detail on government spending, allowing citizens and watchdog groups to view payments made to individual companies, the goods or services purchased, and the benefits obtained in exchange for public subsidies.

All 50 states operate websites to make information on state expenditures accessible to the public, and in the past year these web portals continued to improve. For instance, all but four states provide checkbook-level data for one or more economic development subsidy programs and more than half of states make that subsidy data available for researchers to download and analyze.

For more information on this study, see: http://uspirgedfund.org/reports/usf/following-money-2016 

To download the report, go to: http://uspirgedfund.org/sites/pirg/files/reports/USP%20FollowMoney16%20Report%20Apr16.pdf

 

USASpending.gov revamp might be bumpy

By

USASpending shows 2,681 federal contracts were awarded in the state of Georgia since Oct. 1, 2015, the beginning of FY16.
USASpending shows 2,681 federal contracts were awarded in the state of Georgia since Oct. 1, 2015, the beginning of FY16.

The Treasury Department’s online federal spending tracker might still have some kinks by May 2017, by which time the department is expected to unveil a final version.

During a keynote speech at AFCEA Bethesda on Thursday, Christina Ho, Treasury’s deputy assistant secretary for accounting policy and financial transparency, said she didn’t know “exactly what the outcome will be” for the USASpending.gov revamp. A beta version of the site, which launched early last month, still faces challenges, she said. Treasury is still collecting public feedback and reviews.

“We will get there even if we don’t do all the things that we thought we [could] do by May 2017,” she said. “I can guarantee you where we will be in May 2017 is going to be a lot better than what we have been able to do.”

Keep reading this article at: http://www.nextgov.com/cio-briefing/2015/12/treasury-official-federal-spending-data-should-be-portable/124177

Can small, innovative companies break into D.C. contracting scene?

By

Sharath Mekala’s two-person tech startup isn’t a textbook government contractor.

Village Defense, spawned through a startup incubator called 1776, develops a free app that lets neighbors send real-time alerts to one another if they notice suspicious activity. A premium version, which costs $125 a month, is designed for homeowners associations.

technologyA Washington area native, Mekala recently uprooted from Atlanta and returned to D.C., in part to market Village Defense to behemoth potential customers: the Defense Department, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, and the Education Department. He says President Obama’s public safety initiative, which includes a blueprint for improved community policing, creates an opportunity for apps like Village Defense.

“I think the government is trying to keep up with [technology]… earlier on you’d have to push your way in,” Mekala says.

Federal procurement, once largely unapproachable by startups, could be transforming to let small, creative tech companies in.

Keep reading this article at: http://www.nextgov.com/cio-briefing/2015/07/startup-shakeup-can-small-innovative-companies-break-dc-contracting-scene/117640/

This story appears in the July-August issue of Government Executive magazine. 

Reforms to IGs, acquisition, FOIA included in POGO’s ‘Baker’s Dozen’ of congressional priorities

By

The Project on Government Oversight (POGO) outlined 13 congressional priorities that would make the federal government more transparent, accountable and ethical in a new report.

POGO’s 2015 “Baker’s Dozen” includes areas for legislative reform as well as issues that would benefit from improved oversight, according to the Feb. 11 report.

Near the top of the group’s list is a call to make agency inspectors general more independent and accountable. POGO asks Congress to use legislation to clarify IG authorities and access to agency records, quickly fill IG vacancies and require more thorough responses from agencies on reports. The organization also calls out the Justice Department in particular, asking that the DOJ IG be given more authority to investigate misconduct by DOJ attorneys.

Keep reading this article at: http://www.fiercegovernment.com/story/reforms-igs-acquisition-foia-included-pogos-bakers-dozen-congressional-prio/2015-02-17

 

How mature is the government contracting market?

By

A few months ago, I was preparing some course material to address corporate strategy in the government contracting space.  I wanted, as almost all business school professors do, to use a case study or two from any one of the famous business schools that produce them.

(EDITOR’S NOTE – This is the first in a three-part series on the future of the government contracting market. The series is based on a speech John Hillen, former CEO of Sotera Defense Solutions, delivered as part of the Brown & Brown distinguished lecture series at George Mason University’s School of Management. This first essay deals with the maturation of the GovCon market over the past 50 years.)

Out of tens of thousands of case studies, I could hardly find one done about a government contracting firm.  When I asked a former Harvard Business school professor why this was so, he offered that he doubted that many professors producing these case studies thought that government contracting was a “real” market.

The view is more widely held than one might suspect – even in the national capital region.  Many thoughtful members of Congress involved in acquisition policy, senior leaders in the executive branch, members of media, academia, and elsewhere that I’ve spoken with think that the GovCon market is really more of a political process than a “real” market characterized by competition, innovation, and transparency.  Their prevailing view is that if a GovCon firm can figure out the political process and play that game better than the next guy, they win the contract, right? One monolithic buyer served by a few cartels in a closed cottage industry, right?

Keep reading this article at: http://washingtontechnology.com/Articles/2014/05/20/Insights-Hillen-GovCon-maturity.aspx?m=2&Page=2&p=1

How to reduce the growing number of bid protests

By

With bid protests increasing by almost 50 percent since 2008, many industry observers and policymakers may be tempted to place the blame for procurement slowdown — particularly in the defense industry — squarely on the contractors. Yet to do so to the exclusion of the other key player in this equation — the Defense Department — ignores that bid protests have proliferated largely as a result of the way government does business.

It may be the case that some government contractors file frivolous protests in order to hang onto a contract they once held but subsequently lost, or in an effort to extract concessions from the government, such as the opportunity to start or continue work while the protest is resolved. However, bid protests are a game of high-stakes poker for most contractors. Protests are expensive, and protestors are prohibited from billing their protest costs against their contracts.

Even if the Government Accountability Office (GAO) sustains a protest (and awards the successful protestor its protest costs), a contractor may still need to go through the bidding process all over again, and there is no guarantee that it will win the second time around. In addition, the GAO retains the power to summarily dismiss a protest it deems frivolous, ultimately rendering any effort put into filing a protest a waste of resources. In other words, bid protests do not just slow down the government; they also slow down business for contractors.

Keep reading this article at: http://www.defenseone.com/management/2013/08/how-reduce-growing-number-bid-protests/68582/ 

New Congress could put the brakes on insourcing

By

The 112th Congress is unlikely to let the Obama administration move full-speed ahead on its initiative to bring contractor jobs back in-house, a consultant and a Republican Senate staff member said on Thursday.

Jonathan Etherton, president and owner of the consultancy Etherton and Associates Inc. and a former Senate Armed Services Committee staffer, told an audience of contractors at a Coalition for Government Procurement breakfast he has heard at least three congressional panels plan to look at whether insourcing is being implemented strategically and whether agencies are focusing on critical positions.

Bill Wright, Republican staff director for the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Ad Hoc Subcommittee on Contracting Oversight, noted insourcing is on the radar of ranking member Sen. Scott Brown, R-Mass. Brown is concerned the initiative is moving forward too quickly and without enough consideration of its effect on small businesses, Wright said during the breakfast discussion.

More generally, Brown is looking for ways to improve efficiency during times of mounting national debt, Wright said. The senator is developing an acquisition savings plan that could include expanding strategic sourcing, an approach in which agencies analyze purchasing trends and buy common commodities and services in bulk; rewarding high-performing acquisition teams; and promoting a more specialized acquisition workforce by requiring officials to obtain certifications in certain areas of expertise.

New Congress could put the brakes on insourcing  Much of the subcommittee’s oversight work to date has been bipartisan, Wright added, and Brown is working with the administration on the efficiency initiatives.

Etherton noted, however, that Congress’ overall relationship with the executive branch is likely to grow more adversarial in 2011 with Republicans in control of the House and lawmakers aggressively scheduling oversight hearings.

In addition to insourcing, Etherton said, the next Congress is likely to examine implementation of the 2009 Weapons System Acquisition Reform Act; the relationship between the Defense Contract Audit Agency and the Defense Contract Management Agency; the definition of inherently governmental work; how to best ensure adequate contractor controls against waste, fraud and abuse; and how Defense Department savings initiatives will affect the industrial base.

Wright predicted lawmakers also would focus on transparency surrounding contractor profit incentives and subcontractor performance; tracking contract-related earmarks; and enhancing competition and limiting risk through fixed-price arrangements.

— by Amelia Gruber –  Government Executive – December 16, 2010

Obama administration begins publishing names of federal subcontractors on Web

By

The U.S. government is giving the public new details about how it is spending taxpayer money on government business.

Starting Wednesday, the Obama administration began publicizing the names of subcontractors – the companies that get the majority of federal contracts – along with the dollar amounts they receive.

For years, the government reported only the companies that won major, or prime, government contracts – even if those companies then hired subcontractors to do most of the job. Now taxpayers can follow more accurately where their dollars are going, tracing public money to the specific companies and communities that share in multimillion- and billion-dollar federal work.

The previous dearth of information about government subcontracts led to incomplete and sometimes misleading conclusions about Uncle Sam’s impact on communities.

For example, an agency may have boasted of awarding a $100 million prime contract for debris removal after Hurricane Katrina to a homegrown Louisiana company. But that company may have lacked the equipment to tackle the work, and then hired two hauling companies based in Virginia and Texas to do most of the job.

The new subcontractor details are available on the Office of Management and Budget’s Web site, USASpending.gov. Recipients of all federal contracts and grants larger than $25,000 will be required to report the names of companies they hire.

The subcontractors’ names are being made public as required by the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act, which became law in 2006 under President George W. Bush. The informations’ release is two years behind schedule. A smaller portion of subcontractor information – for contracts larger than $20 million – was made public in October.

Both the Bush and Obama administrations faulted technical obstacles for preventing accurate reporting and Web site publication of subcontractor information. After the Obama administration spent tens of millions of dollars in 2009 to create a public Web site, FederalReporting.gov, to track money spent on stimulus projects – including subcontractor details – it cleared the way for the same information to be published on standard government contracts.

Moira Mack, an OMB spokeswoman, said resources also factored into the delay. Contracting spending dramatically increased under the Bush administration but the number of contracting employees remained stagnant, Mack said.

Because of the law, the public will now learn if a huge contract won by a fledgling minority- or female-owned company helped that firm or instead flowed to a well-heeled contracting firm founded and run by a white man. The records also would reveal whether defense work that was meant to help shore up an electronics company in recession-plagued rural Pennsylvania was instead largely being done by a powerful defense giant in Arlington County.

Craig Jennings, director of federal fiscal policy at OMB Watch, an advocate for government transparency, said the public may learn good and bad news about government spending with the new initiative.

“You really have to follow the chain [of a contract] to the end, or you just don’t know where the dollars are going,” Jennings said. “Before this, sometimes a city is listed as the primary recipient of a grant or contract. We wouldn’t know prior to this that the brother-in-law of the mayor is receiving those subcontracts.”

In an April letter setting reporting deadlines for senior federal managers, Jeffrey Zients, then the acting OMB director, stressed the importance of the transparency effort. “Full and easy access to information on government spending promotes accountability by allowing . . . both the public and public officials to gauge the effectiveness of expenditures,” he wrote. “Transparency also gives the public confidence that we are properly managing its funds.”

One day after being sworn into office, President Obama pledged that his administration would be the most open in history – a vow made in the wake of steady complaints that the Bush administration was too secretive. Although the current administration has made significant progress in releasing public information, it has faced its share of criticism that – like the previous White House – it has been loath to release public information that may cast its team in an unflattering light or hamper its agenda.

Jennings said taxpayers could end up feeling more comfortable about government contracts when they know the nitty-gritty details. Instead of reading on a government Web site about a vague $14 million transportation grant given to a state government, taxpayers now can see how the state split those funds among 20 different road and bridge projects in different locations, and which subcontractors did the jobs.

“All we hear about is stupid, wasteful government spending,” he said. “But this will likely show us how the money is actually coming to your city, even your neighborhood.”

— by Carol D. Leonnig, Washington Post Staff Writer, Wednesday, December 1, 2010

Contracting News

Read More

Contracting Tips

Read More

GTPAC News

Read More

Georgia Tech News

Read More