Acquisition Planning | The Contracting Education Academy

December 10, 2018 By cs

GAO says FEMA needs to use and manage advance contracts more effectively

Following 2005’s Hurricane Katrina, Congress required FEMA to establish contracts for goods and services in advance to enable quick and effective mobilization of resources in the aftermath of a disaster.

As a result, the Federal Emergency Management Office (FEMA) and the Army Corps of Engineers used “advance contracts” for $4.5 billion in goods and services after Hurricanes Harvey, Irma, and Maria, and the California fires of 2017.

But in new audit report just released, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) found that FEMA’s guidance on the use of these types of contracts is unclear, and that inconsistent information from FEMA could impair its efforts to help state and local governments use advance contracts.

GAO found limitations in FEMA’s use of some advance contracts that provided critical goods and services to survivors, including:

An outdated strategy and unclear guidance on how contracting officers should use advance contracts during a disaster, and

Challenges performing acquisition planning.

FEMA also did not always provide complete information in its reports to congressional committees. Specifically, GAO found 29 advance contract actions that were not included in recent reports due to shortcomings in FEMA’s reporting methodology, limiting visibility into its disaster contract spending.

FEMA identified challenges with advance contracts in 2017, including federal coordination with states and localities on their use. FEMA is required to coordinate with states and localities and encourage them to establish their own advance contracts with vendors. However, GAO found inconsistencies in that coordination and the information FEMA uses to coordinate with states and localities on advance contracts. Without consistent information and coordination with FEMA, states and localities may not have the tools needed to establish their own advance contracts for critical goods and services and quickly respond to future disasters.

In its new report, GAO made nine recommendations to FEMA, including that it update its strategy and guidance to clarify the use of advance contracts, improve the timeliness of its acquisition planning activities, revise its methodology for reporting disaster contracting actions to congressional committees, and provide more consistent guidance and information to contracting officers to coordinate with and encourage states and localities to establish advance contracts. FEMA concurred with GAO’s recommendations.

See GAO’s full Dec. 7, 2018 report here: https://www.gao.gov/assets/700/695829.pdf

October 4, 2018 By cs

Agencies need in-house techies to know how to buy good tech, GAO reiterates

Spend enough time around personnel from tech-in-government organizations like 18F and the U.S. Digital Service, and you’ll hear them say something like this: Their teams save the taxpayers money not just by building things, but also by being in the room during large-scale tech acquisitions and knowing the right questions to ask or how to call a salesman’s bluff.

It’s a simple value proposition, leaders say, but a powerful one.

According to a recent Government Accountability Office report, the federal acquisitions workforce writ large needs more of that expertise.

Asked to survey how the acquisition landscape has changed in the past decade, GAO found various improvements in the form of workforce planning and training. But ultimately, it decided, “finding workers with the technical knowledge for complex IT purchases is still difficult.”

Keep reading this article at: https://www.fedscoop.com/federal-agencies-tech-expertise-acquisition-gao-report/

September 6, 2018 By cs

How has federal contract spending changed over time?

DataLab, a unit operated by the U.S. Treasury Department, recently undertook an analysis of ten years of federal contract spending data. The results are thought-provoking.

Take a look at what they discovered when they examined the USAspending.gov database:

Over the past decade, federal spending on contracts increased from fiscal year 2007 through 2010, following the surge in federal funding related to the Recovery Act. As the Recovery Act tapered off in 2011, contract spending began to decrease, which accelerated following sequestration in 2013. By 2015, contract spending had fallen 27 percent from its 2010 peak, before rebounding slightly in the following years.
Seasonal trends in contract spending occur within each year. Spending tends also rise and fall on a monthly cadence, with roughly one small peak and one small drop per month. During the last month of the federal fiscal year — September — contract spending spikes, especially one week prior to the end of the government’s fiscal year.
End-of-year spikes consistently occurred across the decade, and generally followed the broad rise and fall of spending. On average, September spikes accounted for between 6-8 percent of the annual spending in a fiscal year.
USAspending.gov data captures two types of activity related to contracts: 1) the issuance of new contracts, and 2) modifications to existing contracts. Splitting spending on contracts into these two categories, DataLab found that spending on new contracts tended to spike in September. Modifications, however, displayed less variance and did not spike as drastically at the end of each fiscal year. This suggests that new contracts — not modifications—drove the spikes at the end of each fiscal year.
USAspending data also captures what the government received from a contract (i.e., goods or services.) This categorization scheme, utilizing Product and Service Codes, contains almost 6,000 different categories, ranging from Dining Facility Maintenance to Buoys. For this analysis, DataLab collapsed these 6,000 categories into seven high-level groups. Notably, contracts classified as Facilities, Equipment, and Construction, displayed about 3.5 times the level of variance over the decade as total contract spending, and over 50 times the variance of spending on Weapons and Ammunition. Unlike the other categories, contracts for weapons ammunition did not spike at the end of the fiscal year.

DataLab also looked at USAspending data to determine the relationship between the passage of continuing resolutions, new appropriations, and the amount of spending on contracts across the government. Here’s what they found:

Continuing resolutions caused contract spending to spike in the same week, which was not observed for the passage of new appropriations. These findings cohere with qualitative research conducted by the Government Accountability Office (GAO), which noted in February 2018 that “some agency officials reported delaying contracts and application times for grants while under a [continuing resolution].” If agencies are unable to issue new contracts because adequate funds are not available under continuing resolutions, needs accumulate, and then are satisfied once funding is available.
Notably, DataLab found that the passage of new appropriations resulted in a statistically significant decreases in total contracts and especially on professional services contract spending. This suggests that new appropriations allow the government to engage in longer-term budgeting, potentially facilitating forward-looking spending decisions.
DataLab also noted that research and development spending was less variable and less impacted by continuing resolutions, suggesting that this type of service is likely to follow a distinct pattern for contract issuance from the typical cycles followed by other goods and services. As one of the smallest categories of spending, it is possible that this type of contract is partially sheltered from the timing of congressional appropriations.
Other categories showed evidence of very large spikes in spending in response to congressional appropriations, such as transportation and logistic services. Further research as to why specific types of spending are more reactive to continuing resolutions would need to be done to explain why.

To see this report, including trends displayed in graphs and tables, visit: https://datalab.usaspending.gov/contracts-over-time.html

July 16, 2018 By cs

Plan now to attend the Contracting Officer Representative course in November

Contracting officer’s representatives, program/project managers, contracting officers, and industry contracting personnel — all should attend the Contracting Education Academy’s popular 5-day course offering entitled the Contracting Officer Representative and the Contingency Contracting Environment.

**Students attending Georgia Tech’s classes work in teams to tackle real-life contracting problems.**

Course Description

The Contracting Officer’s Representative course (COR 222), coupled with the Contingency Contracting Environment class (COR 206), provides a comprehensive review and detailed instruction on the role, responsibilities, authority, and limitations of authority of the federal government’s Contracting Officer Representative (COR). Students learn the fundamentals of contracting regulations, types, phases, and other elements of contract administration. Students are also coached on the ethical and legal factors that impact COR responsibilities in the normal course of business and in the Contingency Contracting Environment.

Upcoming Dates

The Contracting Education Academy at Georgia Tech is offering the COR course (COR 222/206) on November 26-30, 2018. This course is taught at Georgia Tech’s world-class Global Learning Center in midtown Atlanta.

Who Should Attend

Contracting officer’s representatives, program/project managers, contracting officers, and industry contracting personnel who interface with contracting officers and contracting officer’s representatives.

Registration

For details on how to register, please visit: https://pe.gatech.edu/courses/cor-206222-contracting-officer-representative-course-and-contingency-contracting-environment

How You Will Benefit

You will learn:

How to review contract terms and conditions.
Each party’s role and responsibility in contract administration.
Proper documentation and approvals for contract changes and modifications.
How to monitor contract expenditures.
Contract close-out methodology.
How to manage ethical and legal issues in the contingency contracting environment.

Content

Recognizing the COR’s responsibilities in acquisition mission support planning.
Understanding the contract award process.
Tracking contract expenditures.
Monitoring contract schedule compliance.
Analyzing proposed contract changes.
Identifying the unique characteristics and monitoring protocols for construction contracts, major systems and R & D acquisitions.
Evaluating a contractor’s compliance with performance terms and conditions.
Handling cultural taboos in a contingency environment.
The process for reporting bribery, kickbacks and other illegal acts.

Materials

Provided to each student are a printed guide book with supplemental learning material, exercises, case studies, and handouts, and exclusive web-based materials.

What Students Say About This Course

Here’s a small sampling of feedback from students who have attended Georgia Tech’s COR 206/222 course:

“I got detailed knowledge and understanding of COR and CO duties and responsibilities. I now have the knowledge I need to perform as a COR.”
“A very well-taught course.”
“The instructors are very knowledgeable.”
“Professional training providing insights and practical examples.”
“I valued the exercises — they helped a lot! A wonderful course!”
“Great course — great instructors!”
“Excellent instruction.”
“I valued the format, facilities, and the instructor’s expertise.”
“Invaluable information — a mix of academic and real-world views. Outstanding job.”
“Great job. The knowledge of the instructors was remarkable.”

Additional Information

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. This course is DAU-equivalent training satisfying both FAC-C and DAWIA certification programs.