Critical Function | The Contracting Education Academy

November 17, 2014 By AMK

Acquisition workers as critical thinkers: A change that has to happen

The ever-evolving training regime for federal acquisition workers is no longer just about the hard skills of acquisition.

It’s not that knowing the policy, the regulations and the laws isn’t important. No one would argue that. But acquisition workers need to transform by using soft skills now more than ever to lead successful procurements.

This concept is most evident in version 3 of the Defense Department’s Better Buying Power initiative. One of the key tenets of the effort is the need for critical thinking among acquisition workers.

This is the idea of contracting officers, program managers and others asking the right questions at the right time. Then, they would take those answers to plan and oversee the contract throughout its entire lifecycle.

“We are trying not to teach people just process, but learn why things happen. Part of that is learning all the stakeholders, their different roles and all the processes they play,” said Jim Woolsey, president of the Defense Acquisition University.

Keep reading this article at: http://www.federalnewsradio.com/1332/3721904/Acquisition-workers-as-critical-thinkers-A-change-that-has-to-happen

This story is part of Federal News Radio’s special report, “Missing Pieces of Procurement Reform.”

January 3, 2012 By AMK

Contractors get insourcing warning under defense bill

As Defense Department officials consider insourcing work, Congress wants them to notify contractors of their decision to bring the work inhouse.

The fiscal 2012 National Defense Authorization Act includes a provision requiring DOD to notify companies before insourcing particular jobs. Congress wants officials to give contractors a “timely notification” of their decision.

One expert said the timely notification is a step forward in informing companies that they are losing their contracts. But the provision’s usefulness depends on DOD’s interpretation of the provision.

“How ‘timely’ is defined determines whether this is of any value or not,” said Robert Burton, former deputy OFPP administrator and now partner at the Venable law firm.

Having worked with small contracting companies that lose their business because of insourcing, a timely notification may be a six-month heads-up. Still he said the small businesses often struggle to stay afloat after a decision to insource work.

For the best option, Burton said government officials should talk with companies about the effect of insourcing on their future. Officials should then consider it as a factor in their decision.

Also in the bill, the provision would add slightly to the blurry term of “critical function.”

A critical function is a duty “necessary to maintain sufficient government expertise and technical capabilities” and “entails operational risk associated with contractor performance.”

The Office of Federal Procurement Policy this year defined a critical function as work that’s “necessary to the agency being able to effectively perform and maintain control of its mission and operations.”

Congress also is telling defense officials to give special consideration in taking back these critical functions, as well as acquisition workforce functions and even work that DOD employees have done at some point during the past decade.

Officials would need to test whether to insource certain functions based on guidance in a memo on comparing the estimated costs of civilian, military and contractor support. Officials would also have to decide if insourcing a function would be either 10 percent lower or $10 million less expensive than the contractor’s cost. The choice would not apply to inherently governmental functions, which should only be done by federal employees.

The authorization bill cleared Congress Dec. 15, and now awaits President Barack Obama’s signature or his veto.

About the Author: Matthew Weigelt is a senior writer covering acquisition and procurement for Federal Computer Week. This article appeared Dec. 22, 2011 at http://washingtontechnology.com/articles/2011/12/22/ndaa-timely-notification-insourcing.aspx.

December 27, 2011 By AMK

Congress clarifies ‘critical function’ definition

The fiscal 2012 National Defense Authorization Act may provide a little more clarity to the blurry term “critical function.”

Such a function is a duty “necessary to maintain sufficient government expertise and technical capabilities” and a duty that “entails operational risk associated with contractor performance.”

In the authorization bill, Congress tells Defense Department officials to give special consideration to these critical functions, as well as acquisition workforce functions and even work that DOD employees have done at some during the past decade if they plan to take back work from contractors.

Officials would need to test whether to insource certain functions based on DOD guidance on comparing the estimated costs of who’s doing the work. Officials would also have to decide if insourcing a function would be either 10 percent or $10 million less expensive than the contractor’s cost. The choice would not apply to inherently governmental functions, which should only be done by federal employees.

The authorization bill cleared Congress Dec. 15, and now awaits President Barack Obama’s signature or his veto.

As defense officials consider insourcing work, Congress wants them to notify contractors of their decision to take back their work. DOD would have to give a “timely notification” to companies before insourcing particular jobs.

One expert said the “timely notification” is a step forward in informing the companies that would be losing their contracts. But the provision’s usefulness depends on what DOD considers timely.

“How ‘timely’ is defined determines whether this is of any value or not,” said Robert Burton, former deputy OFPP administrator and now partner at the Venable law firm.

Having worked with small contracting companies that lose their business because of insourcing, he said a useful timely notification may be at least a six-month heads-up.

Still he said small businesses often struggle to stay afloat after insourcing, whether or not they know they’re losing their work.

He had been pushing for such a provision, although he was disappointed Congress didn’t go further than a “timely notification.”

For the best option, he said government officials should talk with companies about the effect of insourcing on their future. Officials should then consider it as a factor in their decision.

About the Author: Matthew Weigelt is a senior writer covering acquisition and procurement for Federal Computer Week. This article appeared on Dec. 21, 2011 at http://fcw.com/articles/2011/12/21/ndaa-critical-function-notification.aspx.

September 19, 2011 By AMK

Will OFPP’s new guidance be used to take jobs from contractors?

“Critical function” is now the controversial term as agency officials interpret new regulations on what work only federal employees should be doing and could be used to increase the insourcing of contractor jobs.

“Inherently governmental function isn’t the big problem,” said Robert Burton, former deputy administrator of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP). “It’s the broad category called ‘critical function.’”

A new policy letter from OFPP defines critical function as work that is “necessary to the agency being able to effectively perform and maintain control of its mission and operations.” Beyond that, the letter tells agency officials to decide case-by-case if work should be done by their own employees or by contractors.

If a contractor is doing the work, agencies must have employees who know the job and who would be able to manage the contractor who is doing the work, according to the policy letter, which was released officially Sept. 12.

The policy holds an agency responsible for making sure it has an adequate number of positions filled by federal employees with appropriate expertise and experience. Those employees need to understand the agency’s requirements and be able to formulate alternative options, if needed, while also monitoring any contractors supporting the federal workforce, thr letter said.

“The more important the function, the more important that the agency have internal capability to maintain control of its mission and operations,” the letter stated.

However, Burton said officials can argue that any job is critical to meeting their agency’s mission and also decide the adequate number of federal employees they need to do it, under this policy.

“We’re missing the elephant in the room,” said Burton, now a partner at the Venable law firm. “What this policy letter does is institutionalize insourcing in the federal government.”

He said these critical functions are the jobs agencies are already insourcing, often to the detriment of small businesses.

The policy letter goes into effect Oct. 12, and, because it came from the OFPP, it is more than guidance. It will be added to the Federal Acquisition Regulation. These will be rules to live by.

The term “critical function” came from the fiscal 2009 National Defense Authorization Act, which told the administration to draw up a single definition of “inherently governmental function” and also lay out criteria for a critical function. OFPP drafted the definition in 75 pages.

As deputy administrator from 2001 to 2008, Burton said the issue isn’t necessarily with writing the policy. It’s how the agency officials apply it.

“The challenge of so much of this is the interpretation,” he said.

Stan Soloway, president of the Professional Services Council, said the policy must have clear guidance for interpreting the intent correctly. He has raised concerns in the past about making agencies prove that their choice to insource work is a good deal.

“As such, it is vital that clear guidance be given to the agencies on how to conduct their cost comparisons to ensure the right outcomes for the American taxpayer,” he said Sept. 9 in a statement.

Burton also said the OFPP missed two important points in the policy. It should have required agency officials to talk with small businesses about the effects that insourcing would have. And it should have required agencies to share their cost comparison data with, at least, the company who faces the loss of its work.

It’s often too late to use the Freedom of Information Act to get the data, he said. By then, the insourcing is completed.

About the Author: Matthew Weigelt is a senior writer covering acquisition and procurement for Washington Technology. Published Sept. 12, 2011 at http://washingtontechnology.com/articles/2011/09/12/critical-function-interpretation-ofpp.aspx?s=wtdaily_140911

Search this Website