Acquisition Workforce | The Contracting Education Academy

September 13, 2018 By cs

GAO acknowledges progress in federal acquisition by Congress and Executive branch, but says ‘challenges endure’

Congress established an Acquisition Advisory Panel to review federal acquisition laws, regulations, and policies — and identify opportunities for improvement. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) just issued an assessment of the progress made since the Panel’s 2007 report.

Here’s what GAO found:

Congress and the executive branch have taken numerous actions to address key issues the Acquisition Advisory Panel identified in its 2007 report, but these actions have not eliminated some enduring challenges. The figure below presents the key issues the Panel addressed in relation to the life cycle of a typical contract as identified by GAO:

Three of the key issues, and the corresponding challenges, align with specific phases in the contracting life cycle:

Requirements Definition: The Panel found that fully identifying requirements before a contract is awarded is key to achieving the benefits of competition. GAO has found that unrealistic requirements have contributed to poor program outcomes at the Department of Defense (DoD), and that the Army’s requirements development workforce decreased by 22 percent from 2008 to 2017.

Competition and Pricing: The Panel said that competition can help reduce prices. GAO’s work shows that competition rates have remained steady government-wide, and declined at DOD. See figure below.

GAO also found that agencies are sometimes using bridge contracts — which GAO has generally defined as either extensions to existing contracts or new short-term, sole-source contracts — to avoid a lapse in service caused by delay of a follow-on contract award. In some instances, bridge contract awards delay opportunities for competition and can place the government at risk of paying higher prices for multiple years. The figure below depicts how an Army bridge contract for computer support services planned for 12 months was extended to 42 months.

Further, GAO’s work shows that agencies have not fully embraced initiatives and techniques intended to reduce the prices they pay, including consolidated purchasing approaches and robust market research.

Contractor Oversight: The Panel raised questions about the capacity of federal agencies to oversee contractors. GAO found that agencies continue to award contracts warranting increased management attention at a steady rate, such as contracts for management support services. With contracts like those for management support services, there is an increased risk that contractors may perform tasks reserved for the government. Additionally, GAO found that heavy workloads at the Department of Veterans Affairs have made it difficult for officials who oversee contractors to ensure contractors adhere to contract terms.

Three of the key issues, and the corresponding challenges, cut across all the phases of the contracting life cycle:

Acquisition Workforce: The Panel found that the federal acquisition workforce faces workload and training challenges. GAO’s work has shown that DoD has enhanced its workforce, but some workforce gaps endure at DoD and across agencies.

Federal Procurement Data: The Panel found that the government’s primary repository for acquisition data contained some unreliable data. Also, GAO found that the system has demonstrated limitations. For example, guidance from the Office of Management Budget (OMB) required that agencies collect specific contract award data, but the system did not have the capability to do so.

Small Business Participation: The Panel found a number of challenges hindering agencies’ efforts to meet small business goals. GAO found small business participation has increased, but many agencies are not in full compliance with requirements governing Offices of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization (OSDBUs). For example, the directors of these offices should report directly to agency heads or their deputies, but not all agencies have established this type of direct reporting relationship.

What GAO Recommends

GAO did not make any new recommendations in its Sept. 12, 2018 assessment, but it has made numerous recommendations in the past. Federal agencies have agreed with many of GAO’s recommendations, and have implemented some of them, but not others. For example, GAO has previously made the following recommendations.

The Army should assess the resources needed for the requirements development process. The Army agreed, but it has not yet done so.

OMB should provide guidance for agencies to manage bridge contracts. OMB agreed and has drafted management guidance but has not yet finalized it.

Certain federal agencies should take steps to document how they conduct market research. The agencies agreed and did so.

The Department of Veterans Affairs should develop tools to help oversee contracts. The department agreed and did so.

DOD should have issued an updated acquisition workforce plan in fiscal year 2016. DOD agreed and issued the plan.

OMB should take steps to improve how agencies collect certain procurement data. OMB generally agreed, but has not yet addressed the recommendation.

Certain federal agencies should take steps to comply with OSDBU-related requirements. Most agencies that provided comments agreed or partially agreed. Two agencies — the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and the U.S. Agency for International Development — have addressed the recommendations.

It its latest report, GAO reiterates its belief that all agencies should implement all of these recommendations.

See the GAO’s full report here: https://www.gao.gov/assets/700/694457.pdf

August 28, 2018 By cs

Program management is much more complex than many leaders understand

The Government Accountability Office has long bemoaned the dearth of effective program management across government.

Its list of high-risk programs, which encompass such disparate management areas as the national flood insurance program, the 2020 Census, Defense contract management and the security clearance process, reflects how widespread the problem is.

A 2015 study by the National Academy of Public Administration reinforces GAO’s concerns, concluding that “institutionalizing the discipline of program management across the federal government should be a top priority.” This included creating an integrated approach to program management, creating a professional community and clarifying roles and responsibilities. But what is the best approach for doing this?

A Career Path

By the end of 2016, Congress adopted legislation reflecting many of the Academy’s recommendations, including the development of a formal job series and career path for federal program managers and a standards-based model for program management. This law, the Program Management Improvement Accountability Act, required the Office of Management and Budget to develop implementation guidance and required agencies to develop specific implementation plans. The OMB guidance was issued this past June, with a timetable for agency plans to be developed by the end of the year.

Keep reading this article at: https://www.govexec.com/excellence/promising-practices/2018/08/program-management-much-more-complex-many-leaders-understand/150373

August 22, 2018 By cs

Pentagon’s contracting gurus mismanaged their own contracts

The Pentagon’s contracting gurus repeatedly made massive, preventable mistakes while managing contracts for a critical software project of their own, violating federal budget law along the way, according to scathing internal reports and other records obtained by the Project On Government Oversight (POGO).

Ironically, the purpose of the mismanaged system is to help manage the rest of the Pentagon’s contracts.

The Pentagon relies on the obscure Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) to negotiate and administer $5 trillion in contracts across the Defense Department as an average of $455 million in taxpayer dollars are paid out each day to contractors. How well that agency does its job directly affects both how wisely taxpayer dollars are spent and whether our troops get what they need when they need it. Yet the cascading series of major, systemic failures within the agency, which has nearly 12,000 employees and an annual budget of roughly $1.5 billion, led an independent investigator from the Army to go so far as to recommend that it be prohibited from awarding its own contracts in the future.

Documents obtained by POGO — including a September 2017 preliminary investigative report, an April 2018 internal memo, and a draft of the final report from this summer — show that over the course of several years, the agency mismanaged contracts for the software project. The agency spent far more than it was authorized to spend, violated numerous policies and regulations, and received insufficient oversight from the Pentagon. When these documents are viewed alongside Defense Department watchdog findings from recent years, there appears to be an agency-wide pattern of failing to adequately support the Pentagon’s procurement efforts and sufficiently protect the taxpayer — the agency’s very mission.

Keep reading this article at: http://www.pogo.org/our-work/articles/2018/pentagons-contracting-gurus-mismanaged-their-own-contracts.html

August 20, 2018 By cs

Federal acquisition workers rate themselves highly on most skills

The government’s civilian acquisition workforce, long under pressure to improve hiring and modernize its skill sets, is feeling more satisfied with its own effectiveness, according to the latest biennial Acquisition Workforce Competency Survey released last week.

***Click on image above to see report.***

Considered the most comprehensive version of the survey yet (an 83 percent increase in response rates across agencies), it showed that the buyers rated themselves highest for issuing contract order changes and modifications, awarding contracts and competition. Also rated highly were inspection and acceptance and business acumen, said the results analyzed by a partnership between the White House Office of Federal Procurement Policy and the Federal Acquisition Institute.

Areas rated the lowest in proficiency included negotiating forward pricing rates agreements and contracting in contingent or combat environments.

Keep reading this article at: https://www.govexec.com/contracting/2018/08/federal-acquisition-workers-rate-themselves-highly-most-skills/150611

August 13, 2018 By cs

Comprehensive contract planning course being offered Oct. 22-26

Whether you represent government or industry, this is your chance to learn how the Government plans its acquisition of products and services!

As a member of the government’s acquisition team, don’t you need to learn how to conduct acquisition planning properly?
As a contractor, wouldn’t you like to gain insights into the government’s contract planning process?

The Contracting Education Academy at Georgia Tech will address these questions, and many more, in a comprehensive five-day class, “Contract Planning in the FAR” (CON 090-2) to be presented October 22-26, 2018.

The course will be presented at the world-class Global Learning Center in midtown Atlanta. Registration details are here: http://www.pe.gatech.edu/courses/con-090-2-contract-planning-far

This in-depth course covers all aspects of acquisition planning, including:

How government agencies conduct market research and rely on businesses to provide information,
How the government’s buying needs must be described, and
The government’s preference for commercial and non-developmental items.

This course is the second in a series of four educational modules that examine the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), the Government’s “procurement bible.”

For government contracting officials, this course is required to earn and maintain a contracting warrant. A warrant is a written document providing a contracting officer with the limits of his or her authority. Per FAR 1.601-2, Contracting Officers have the authority to “enter into, administer, or terminate contracts and make related determinations and findings” to the extent of the authority delegated to them by their warrant. Georgia Tech’s Contracting Education Academy offers a set of courses — each equivalent to Defense Acquisition University (DAU) course standards — that help each member of the acquisition workforce maintain their warrants and enhance their professional development.
For business people who compete for and fulfill government contracts, Academy classes are just as pertinent. Contractor personnel who attend Academy courses gain real-world knowledge about how government officials are trained to formulate and administer contracts. Insights into these areas provide invaluable guidance for reaching greater success in competing for, winning, and fulfilling government contract work.

For groups of 10 or more, Georgia Tech offers discounts. Benefits of attendance include expert instruction, a printed student guide to be used back on the job, valuable handouts, and exclusive electronic resources. In addition, a complimentary breakfast is provided each morning, along with snacks throughout each day.

Improve Your Win Rate — **Government and industry representatives sit side-by-side in small group settings to learn government contracting fundamentals at Georgia Tech’s Global Learning Center.**

For details on all of Georgia Tech’s government contracting classes, including the FAR Fundamentals course series, please visit http://www.pe.gatech.edu/Subjects/Acquisition-Government-Contracting.