blanket purchase agreements | The Contracting Education Academy

March 27, 2012 By AMK

Former OFPP chief cites progress in federal acquisition and workforce

Daniel I. Gordon, who served as the Administrator for Federal Procurement Policy from 2009 through 2011, has authored a paper on his tenure in at the Office of Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP).

The paper, published in the Government Contractor, presents reflections on his three goals while Administrator: strengthening the federal acquisition workforce, driving fiscal responsibility in federal acquisition, and rebalancing the relationship with contractors.

Gordon points to reversal of several negative trends, in particular, decline in the size of the federal acquisition workforce during the years 1992-2009, unsustainable annual increases in procurement spending during those years, and an unhealthy overreliance on contractors in performance of key government functions. In each of those key areas, Gordon reports on the progress made — increasing the size of the federal acquisition workforce, buying less and buying smarter (particularly through the strategic sourcing initiative), and a better balance in relations with contractors, with more clarity about the proper role of contractors and improved oversight, as well as efforts to increase communication with vendors.

A full copy of the article can be downloaded here: Reflections on the Federal Procurement Landscape – February 2012.

October 5, 2011 By AMK

OMB issues guidance boosting interagency purchasing

Encouraging agencies to reduce waste by leveraging their “own buying power,” the federal chief procurement officer on Thursday issued guidance designed to reduce duplication in acquisitions by increasing interagency contracting and information sharing.

Dan Gordon, administrator of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy, in a letter to chief acquisition officers and senior procurement executives, wrote that too often, “agencies establish new overlapping and duplicative contracts for supplies or services because the agencies have not adequately considered the suitability of existing interagency contract vehicles: governmentwide acquisition contracts, multiagency contracts and blanket purchase agreements.”

Failure to exploit such opportunities for new efficiencies, he said, “results in higher prices and unnecessary administrative costs.”

Beginning in January 2012, the guidance directs, agency managers should not enter into a new contract without first performing a cost-benefit analysis to “balance the value of creating a new contract against the benefit of using an existing one, and whether the expected return from investment in the proposed contract is worth the taxpayer resources,” Gordon wrote on the White House blog.

The guidance is intended to deal with goods and services such as office supplies and wireless services. “This kind of due diligence and comparison shopping is something that many families across the country do,” the letter stated.

“The guidance will also increase information sharing among agencies,” it added, noting that for years many agencies have focused solely on doing all their own contracting. “We have seen firsthand that interagency contracting — done intelligently, and in a way that reduces duplication — can help us leverage the federal government’s buying power to get better prices.”

Such savings, Gordon said, also would help persuade the Government Accountability Office to remove interagency contracting from its high-risk list.

He praised the General Services Administration’s move in spring 2010 to sign a series of blanket purchase agreements for office supplies. GSA’s award of 15 contracts, 13 of them to small businesses, has produced savings up to 20 percent on office supplies, which will add up to more than $200 million in the next few years, Gordon said.

The new guidance is part of the Obama administration’s Campaign to Cut Waste led by Vice President Joe Biden, who met with Cabinet members on the effort this month.

The approach drew praise from Sean Moulton, director of federal information policy for the nonprofit OMB Watch. “It makes a lot of sense, this idea of coordinating purchases of common elements, getting more consistent — and probably lower — prices and not wasting time,” he said. A similar approach used by the Texas state comptroller of public accounts, he added, has saved millions of dollars.

Scott Amey, general counsel of the nonprofit Project on Government Oversight, said, “There might be slight improvements and savings associated with today’s announcement. Buying in bulk and eliminating duplication will help, but we need to make sure we ask two critical questions, what are we buying and how are we buying it?”

— by Charles S. Clark – Government Executive – September 30, 2011 – http://www.govexec.com/story_page.cfm?articleid=48938&dcn=e_gvet.

August 31, 2011 By AMK

GSA plans huge BPAs for laptops, desktops and other devices

The General Services Administration plans to award a series of blanket purchase agreements through which federal agencies can buy common IT products at the best prices in government.

GSA might might create as many as 10 BPAs for products, such as laptop, desktop and notebook computers and video teleconferencing equipment, according to a proposal released Aug. 19. Officials estimate the BPAs for laptops, desktops, and notebooks could see at least $276 million in sales over three years.

The program, managed by GSA’s National Information Technology Commodity Program in Atlanta, is an offshoot of the Obama administration’s 25-point plan to reform IT management, which calls for the federal government to centralize spending on IT commodities.

“The NITCP has a goal to improve consistency of IT commodity offerings across the federal government,” officials wrote in the proposal.

Officials would be able to coordinate agencies’ common business needs and adjust as demand changes. GSA has expressed hope that the BPAs will make it easier for the government to negotiate for better volume discounts and improved services. Officials have wanted to make commodity IT products the next stage of strategic sourcing, in which multiple organizations team up on procurement deals.

GSA wants to be the central hub for IT purchasing.

“The NITCP’s vision is to be viewed as the leading source and first choice for providing IT commodity end-to-end solutions for federal customers,” officials wrote.

However, it might not be easy, one expect said.

The government has tried to commoditize IT in the past, and it hasn’t worked, said Larry Allen, president of Allen Federal Business Partners and former president of the Coalition for Government Procurement.

“I don’t know that I see government IT buyers going back to stand-alone product buys,” he said.

Further, most of the government’s IT assets are purchased as an integrated service or solution, he said. GSA’s own Alliant and its 8(a) set-aside governmentwide acquisition contracts are set up to sell commodities as part of a package. GSA also has Schedule 70.

He said it doesn’t make sense to pull everything under one program either, when NASA has its Solutions for Enterprise-wide Procurement. The Navy and the Homeland Security Department, for example, also have their own contracts.

“IT commoditization has been tried before and it hasn’t worked,” he said. “I am skeptical that it will work this time around.”

About the Author: Matthew Weigelt is a senior writer covering acquisition and procurement for Washington Technology. Published Aug. 22, 2011 at http://washingtontechnology.com/articles/2011/08/22/gsa-commodity-it-bpa-proposal.aspx

June 1, 2011 By AMK

Gordon: Look to component BPAs, not interagency contracts, for inefficiencies

Federal agencies do not, in fact, spend $200 billion annually through interagency contracts–they spend more like $50 billion, and most of that through General Services Administration schedule contracts, said Dan Gordon, administrator of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy. Gordon testified May 25 before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.

The number of interagency contracts have been the subject of much hand wringing during the past few years, but the $200 billion figure often cited as annual volume in fact represents the amount agencies spend through indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity contracts, whether set up for interagency purchases or not, Gordon said.

Of the $50 billion that is spent through interagency contracts–whereby one agency places orders for goods or service through a contract vehicle managed by another agency, usually paying a transaction fee of less than 1 percent–slightly less than $40 billion goes through GSA schedule contracts, Gordon said. Several billion dollars are spent via governmentwide acquisition contracts, which are interagency vehicles for the purchase of information technology only. “What’s left over is a small number of contracts,” Gordon added.

One of the main arguments against interagency contracts is that they undermine the ability of the federal government to consolidate its purchasing power since it presents multiple access points to industry. (Advocates argue that technology procurement in pre-competition days was awful, since procurement officials in charge of monopolistic governmentwide contracting lacked incentive.) But, according to Gordon, the real challenge to purchasing power dispersal isn’t from interagency contracting, but from intraagency contracting.

“Far too often, separate and redundant contracts and BPA–blanket purchase agreements–are awarded by each agency component to serve a narrow customer base, which duplicates effort and denies us the benefit of the federal government being the world’s largest customer,” he added.

Whereas it’s possible to track down with exactitude the number of interagency contracting vehicles–via a private sector database, Gordon said–the number of BPAs remains a mystery. “If you asked me how many BPA exit under the [GSA] schedule, the answer is I don’t know,” he explained.

In response to a question during the hearing from the committee’s ranking member, Susan Collins (R-Maine) about a controversial draft executive order that would require potential federal contractors to disclose political contributions, including those to independent third parties, Gordon refused to comment directly. However, he said that the Obama administration “will protect our contracting system from any appearance of political influence.”

Collins said the draft order, if enacted, would do exactly that. “Businesses are going to decide that the system is stacked against them, and not bother to submit a bid. Because otherwise, why would this information be required?” she said.

Meanwhile, the House of Representatives attached on the evening of May 25 an amendment to the fiscal 2012 national defense authorization bill that would preclude the executive branch from ever implementing such an executive order. The amendment, sponsored by Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla), gained 261 votes in favor, including from 26 Democrats. Only one Republican, Rep. Walter Jones (N.C.) voted against it.

— by David Perera – Fierce Government – May 25, 2011 at http://www.fiercegovernmentit.com/story/gordon-look-component-bpas-not-interagency-contracts-inefficiencies/2011-05-25?utm_medium=nl&utm_source=internal

Search this Website