The Contracting Education Academy

Contracting Academy Logo
You are here: Home / Archives for GAO

By

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  • An outdated strategy and unclear guidance on how contracting officers should use advance contracts during a disaster, and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

 

 

By

Pentagon lags on policing lowest price, technically acceptable contracts

Two years after Congress required clearer criteria on when the Defense Department could issue lowest price, technically-acceptable (LPTA) contracts, Pentagon contracting officers still lack adequate written guidance, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) concluded in a recently released audit.

Under the fiscal 2017 National Defense Authorization Act (Section 813), the department is required to amend the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to reflect eight criteria that justify the sometimes-controversial use of LPTA’s for awards of $5 million or more. (The requirements governing their use were expanded in the fiscal 2018 version.)

FAR Part 15 describes the use of several competitive source selection processes to meet agency needs, which include the LPTA process and tradeoff process on a best value continuum.

Though this type of contract can be efficient and quick for obtaining supplies and services, competing contractors often complain that the vehicle can short-change quality.

Keep reading this article at: https://www.nextgov.com/cio-briefing/2018/11/pentagon-lags-policing-lowest-price-technically-acceptable-contracts/152955/

By

GAO reiterates that agencies must meaningfully consider price in ‘best value’ tradeoffs

In three related bid protest decisions made public in the last few weeks, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) reaffirmed the principle that agencies must meaningfully consider price when making best value tradeoff decisions. 

GAO sustained the protests, stressing that merely paying lip service to price while selecting a more expensive, higher-rated offeror is not sufficient — agencies must provide a rational explanation for why they have decided to pay a premium for the awardee’s technical superiority.

In Solers, Inc., B-414672.3 et al.; Technatomy Corporation, B-414672.5; and OGSystems, LLC, B-414672.6 et al., three disappointed offerors challenged the Defense Information Systems Agency’s (DISA) award of Multiple Award Task Order contracts to 14 contractors as part of the Systems Engineering, Technology, and Innovation program.

The solicitation provided that DISA would make award on a best-value tradeoff basis considering price and four technical factors that, when combined, were significantly more important than price.  The agency made award to the 14 highest rated proposals in the non-price factors, opining — without elaboration — that “the technical merit of those proposals justifies paying a price premium over lower-rated, lower-priced proposals.”  Indeed, throughout the evaluation process, the agency repeatedly noted — again without elaboration — that the awardees’ proposals were worth a premium.

Keep reading this article at: https://www.insidegovernmentcontracts.com/2018/11/hey-big-spender-gao-reiterates-that-agencies-must-meaningfully-consider-price-in-best-value-tradeoffs/

By

Federal Circuit charts new terrain in ‘commercial item’ contracting

Last month, the Federal Circuit weighed in on a largely-overlooked provision in the Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act (FASA) that requires federal agencies, to the maximum extent practicable, to procure commercially available goods and services to meet their needs. 

In the case — Palantir USG v. United States — the court affirmed the decision by the Court of Federal Claims (COFC) enjoining the Army from proceeding with its Distributed Common Ground System – Army Increment 2 (DCGS-A2) procurement until it complies with the FASA provision.

This bid protest decision has potentially significant implications for commercial item contractors.

DCGS-A2 is not your average solicitation for an IT system.  It is phase two of the Army’s flagship system for processing multi-sensor intelligence — a program that the Army has spent nearly two decades and billions of dollars trying to develop.  For several years prior to the release of the DCGS-A2 solicitation, Palantir — the protester — informed the Army that the company already had a commercial item that Palantir believed fit the Army’s requirements.  Despite Palantir’s communications regarding the capabilities of its product, the Army issued a single-source indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity solicitation focused on developing a new intelligence data management system — essentially from scratch.  Palantir protested the solicitation and argued that it violated FASA’s mandate regarding the use of commercial items.

Keep reading this article at: https://www.insidegovernmentcontracts.com/2018/10/federal-circuit-charts-new-terrain-commercial-item-contracting/

By

Are GSA’s bold data management and transparency moves the right moves?

Data is essential to guide evidence-based decision-making, a critical best practice toward informed policy development.

A recent Government Accountability Office report has taken the government to task for failing to properly implement empirically sound and evidence-based practices as part of their deliberative process.

To encourage evidence-based decision-making, the recent President’s Management Agenda laid out a new cross-agency priority goal—“Leveraging Data as a Strategic Asset”—to develop and implement a comprehensive federal data strategy. Over the course of the next year, with input from the full spectrum of government and non-government stakeholders, the first governmentwide data strategy will be developed, along with specific recommendations for implementation. Office of Management and Budget sought to inform this process by issuing a comment draft in June.

By most accounts, the commitment to an overarching federal data strategy is welcome and timely. Huge amounts of data collected and managed by the federal government can be applied in a large variety of ways to foster economic growth and social good.

Keep reading this article at: https://www.nextgov.com/ideas/2018/10/are-gsas-bold-data-management-and-transparency-moves-right-moves/152043/

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