The Contracting Education Academy

Contracting Academy Logo
  • Home
  • Training & Education
  • Services
  • Contact Us
You are here: Home / Archives for BPA

March 28, 2014 By AMK

Major departments seek continuous monitoring acquisition independence from DHS

Some federal agencies are choosing to buy continuous monitoring tools independently of the Homeland Security Department’s Continuous Diagnostics and Mitigation Program despite forfeiting DHS procurement money for those tools when doing so.

Those agencies have sought and received a “delegation of procurement authority” from the CDM program. That means they are able to use the blanket purchase agreements for security tools set up by GSA for the CDM program. But, if they exercise the delegation by buying tools themselves rather than through program office, they do it “with their own money,” said Jim Piché, a GSA acquisition manager newly appointed to overseeing the blanket purchase agreements.

A GSA spokeswoman said the agency won’t release a list of the agencies that received a delegation.Piché spoke Wednesday during a Washington, D.C. industry-sponsored panel on the program.

An industry source says agencies with a delegation include the departments of Agriculture, Homeland Security, Justice and Veterans Affairs.

Keep reading this article at: http://www.fiercegovernmentit.com/story/major-departments-seek-continuous-monitoring-acquisition-independence-dhs/2014-03-19

Filed Under: Government Contracting News Tagged With: acquisition strategy, Agriculture Dept., blanket purchase agreements, BPA, CDM, DHA, GSA, Justice Dept., risk assessment, risk management, VA

January 21, 2013 By AMK

Top 3 influences on federal acquisition in 2013

For more than 15 years until 2008, federal procurement spending has risen steadily.  But the winds have been shifting, and 2013 could be a sea change.

Dan Gordon, associate dean for government procurement law at the George Washington University Law School and the former administrator at the Office of Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP), says there is keen interest among contractors and budget hawks alike in seeing if the downward spending trend continues this year.

Gordon recently listed the Top 3 things he’s watching that will impact federal acquaisition in 2013.  You can find them listed at: http://www.federalnewsradio.com/741/3181234/Top-3-for-2013—Dan-Gordon-on-contract-spending.

Filed Under: Government Contracting News Tagged With: acquisition strategy, acquisition workforce, BPA, budget, budget cuts, lowest cost technically acceptable, OFPP, spending, strategic sourcing

November 14, 2012 By AMK

GSA plans new governmentwide software contracts

The General Services Administration (GSA) plans to create a slate of new blanket purchase agreements with large commercial software publishers to be used governmentwide, according to solicitation documents issued Thursday, Nov. 8, 2012.

The new contracts will allow agencies to use software from a collection of large publishers based on standard rates negotiated by GSA rather than negotiating purchases themselves.

Officials from GSA’s SmartBUY program and a cadre of software advisers from across the government are seeking input from major publishers as they put the BPAs together, the sources sought document said.

Keep reading this article at: http://www.nextgov.com/cloud-computing/2012/11/gsa-plans-new-governmentwide-software-contracts/59418/?oref=ng-channeltopstory.

Filed Under: Government Contracting News Tagged With: BPA, buying smarter, GSA, IT, software, technology

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

Filed Under: Government Contracting News Tagged With: blanket purchase agreements, BPA, Daniel Gordon, GSA Schedules, IDIQ, interagency contracts, OFPP, political contributions

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3

Popular Topics

abuse acquisition reform acquisition strategy acquisition training acquisition workforce Air Force Army AT&L bid protest budget budget cuts competition cybersecurity DAU DFARS DHS DoD DOJ FAR fraud GAO Georgia Tech GSA GSA Schedule GSA Schedules IG industrial base information technology innovation IT Justice Dept. Navy NDAA OFPP OMB OTA Pentagon procurement reform protest SBA sequestration small business spending technology VA
Contracting Academy Logo
75 Fifth Street, NW, Suite 300
Atlanta, GA 30308
info@ContractingAcademy.gatech.edu
Phone: 404-894-6109
Fax: 404-410-6885

RSS Twitter

Search this Website

Copyright © 2023 · Georgia Tech - Enterprise Innovation Institute