OFPP | The Contracting Education Academy

November 21, 2011 By AMK

OFPP warns against cuts to acquisition workforce

The Obama administration’s top procurement official said Wednesday the government has made gains in recruiting and training new members of its acquisition workforce, while also warning Congress about the consequences of rolling back those improvements.

Dan Gordon, who will soon leave his post as administrator of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy to head to a new job at George Washington University, said he’s very concerned that the progress the government has managed to make over the past few years with respect to regrowing its acquisition workforce is at risk as agencies and Congress look to trim budgets.

The ranks of clearly identifiable government contracting professionals grew by roughly six-and-a-half percent between 2009 and 2010. This comes after a 2000-2008 period in which contracting doubled and the contracting workforce stayed flat, Gordon told the House Oversight and Government Reform Subcommittee on Technology, Information Policy, Intergovernmental Relations and Procurement Reform.

But the drive to reduce government spending could alter the trajectory of acquisition workforce improvements, he said.”The progress we’ve made over the past two years is at risk,” he said. “Budgetary pressures risk slashing the federal acquisition workforce, whether it’s a matter of cutting salaries, cutting benefits, showing disrespect for our federal workforce, cutting the numbers of people or cutting the training that they’re getting. We cannot protect the federal acquisition process without a good federal acquisition workforce. I’m very concerned that budgetary pressures are going to unroll much of the progress we’ve had.”

Gordon told members of the subcommittee the inadequate acquisition workforce of the 2000s manifested itself with real consequences for government procurement. The results, he said, were poor communication with industry, badly-defined government requirements, too many sole-source contracts, poorly run competitions and not enough contractor oversight.

Contractors know more

And in too many cases, even today, contractors are better at navigating the federal procurement system than government contracting officers are, Gordon said.

“We can’t have situations where we have contractors knowing way more than us,” he said. “We need to strengthen our people so that they’re knowledgeable. Contractors are incredibly important, but they’re supporting us. We need to be knowledgeable enough so that there’s a balance.”

The government has plenty of training programs for acquisition professionals, most notably with the Defense Department’s Defense Acquisition University, which trained 57,000 people over the past year. But Congressman Gerry Connolly (D-Va.) said he worries there’s not as robust a program for feds who handle acquisition for civilian agencies.”When I look at the comparison between how it’s done in the defense world and how it’s done in the rest of the civilian agencies, it’s so unbalanced,” Connolly said. “In terms of training resources, a lot of the people who get training in the civilian world end up having to go to DAU, because we simply don’t have the resources in the Federal Acquisition Institute to do the training.”

Connolly has proposed legislation that would boost funding for the institute, set up more uniform standards for acquisition training in civilian agencies and place it under the control of Gordon’s office.

Gordon wants FAI to stay put

Gordon said he’d actually prefer that FAI continue to operate within the General Services Administration — where it is now. But he agreed that a lack of formalized training programs geared toward civilian-agency acquisition personnel has been a problem.

“Online training is one of the ways to overcome that challenge,” he said. “DAU is working with FAI and others to share their resources. It’s true that when civilian employees go to DAU, they sometimes feel that it’s not beneficial, because it’s so oriented toward DoD. But the more those two institutions share their resources, the further our taxpayer dollars are going to go.”Roger Jordan, the vice president of government relations for the Professional Services Council, a group that represents contractors, said his members agree with Gordon. They want to see the acquisition workforce grow and become more competent.

“A well-educated customer is really our best customer,” he said. “We do find we’re having to do a lot of education on acquisition-related issues. It would certainly be beneficial to both sides if an understanding is brought to the table in advance, so we can get to the business of contracting instead of educating.”

The council thinks the acquisition workforce has become unnecessarily standoffish with industry over the past decade, Jordan said, and a lack of training has led contracting officers to make decisions that vendors don’t understand, such as insisting on fixed-price contracts in situations where they’re not appropriate.

Even with DAU, DoD struggles

But even with the well-established DAU in place, the Defense Department hasn’t been exempt from training challenges. Katrina McFarland, DAU’s president, said when DoD rolled out the department’s Better Buying Power initiative, it quickly realized its acquisition workforce didn’t have the skills it needed to meet the call for driving better business deals that the initiative originally envisioned.”What can you do to improve that? In fixed-price, for example, you have to explain to people where they find the right resources to figure out cost and price certainty,” McFarland said. “You have to have a good understanding of the configuration of the item before you try to engage in a fixed-price contract. Unfortunately, people engage in acts of compliance rather than acts of understanding. That critical thinking is one of our challenges.”

In the meantime, FAI still is working to develop training programs that can work for civilian agencies, and are relevant to each agency’s mission.”The Chief Acquisition Officers Council just approved us to establish a training collaboration board,” said Donna Jenkins, FAI director. “That would enable us to discuss any courses we’re going to develop. We can come up with the 80 percent solution once, and then leave room for agencies to add their specific mission requirements in the remaining portion. I think that’s a good role for FAI.”

— by Jared Serbu – Federal News Radio – 11/17/2011 at http://www.federalnewsradio.com/?nid=85&sid=2636742.

November 14, 2011 By AMK

Do Alaska Native Corporations deserve their special contracting status?

For many people, the government’s set-aside program for Alaska Native Corporations is a blemish on the federal acquisition system. Even people who otherwise support the idea of setting aside contracts for economically disadvantaged groups take a dim view of the program, which allows agencies to award contracts of any size to ANC firms without competition.

Ever since the death of its champion, Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens, opponents have called for the program to end. Here is an overview of the arguments for and against keeping it.

The case for the ANC program:

* It’s a time-saver. Agencies can award sole-source contracts of any size to ANCs at any time. Therefore, the ANC program lets contracting officers move quickly when they’re pressured for time or caught in emergency situations, such as preparing for a hurricane.

The contracting officer doesn’t have to spend time justifying a sole-source award when using an ANC, said Larry Allen, president of Allen Federal Business Partners.

Officials also save time by avoiding the bid protests that are always a risk during full-and-open competitions.

* It stimulates the economy. The program benefits Alaska natives in economically depressed areas in the state and other parts of the country.

A 2009 survey of 11 ANCs by the Native American Contractors Association (NACA) showed that the companies provided more than $530 million in various types of benefits to more than 67,000 shareholders from 2000 to 2008. More than $341 million of that money was in cash dividends.

Alaska natives are given the opportunity to go to college, for instance, with their shares in the ANCs, said Jennine Elias, director of external affairs at NACA.

The program also provides funding for housing and government services, such as law enforcement.

* It’s a promise-keeper. ANCs were created to settle land claims with Alaska natives and foster economic development, and the companies have been allowed to participate in the government’s 8(a) minority-owned small-business program since 1986. Therefore, the ANC program fulfills a promise to the native community, Elias said.

The case against the ANC program:

* It short-circuits the procurement process. Although sole-source provisions can help in emergencies, the process can tempt an official to award a contract when it would be better to hold a competition for the work, Allen said.

There’s no doubt that contracting officers are overworked, and the ANC program can help ease their workload. But, he cautioned, “a program with good intentions can get out of control.”

* It undermines efforts to level the playing field. There was a big push for parity in government several years ago. Companies in Historically Underutilized Business Zones used to have first crack at set-aside contracts, but Congress put all small businesses on an equal footing last year.

“The theme is parity among other guys,” said Rob Burton, former deputy administrator at the Office of Federal Procurement Policy and now a partner at Venable law firm. But because ANCs don’t have to follow the same rules as other small businesses, they have “an incredible deal.”

Other small-business owners and Federal Computer Week readers have voiced their frustrations.

“The ANC advantage is unfair to real 8(a) companies and should be disbanded,” commented one reader from Virginia.

* Its benefits to the native community are questionable. The benefits ANC shareholders receive have come under scrutiny over the years. Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), chairwoman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee’s Contracting Oversight Subcommittee, has found some problems with the program.

In 2009, her subcommittee’s analysis revealed that only about $615 a year in money, scholarships and other benefits go to each member of the Alaska native community. The report also says the ANCs employ a relatively small percentage of shareholders and often send work to outside subcontractors. McCaskill has proposed changes to match other small-business rules.

However, Elias said ANCs are already required to report on what they’re doing in their community in the interests of transparency.

And Allen said it’s a good program that would benefit from oversight by every agency, not just the Small Business Administration.

About the Author: Matthew Weigelt is a senior writer covering acquisition and procurement for Washington Technology. Published Nov. 8, 2011 at http://washingtontechnology.com/articles/2011/11/07/home-page-acquisition-pros-cons-anc.aspx?s=wtdaily_091111.

November 9, 2011 By AMK

New rule funnels more contracts to small businesses

Under a proposed new rule, small companies are expected to get more business through multiple-award contractors because that’s where the money has increasingly been going since the mid-1990s.

Regulators have revised the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) to match the fluctuation toward task-order contracts, such as governmentwide acquisition contracts, blanket purchase agreements and agencywide contracts. The Office of Federal Procurement Policy has pushed those types of vehicles to streamline purchasing and get lower prices.

Officials released an interim rule Nov. 2 about the FAR revisions. The rule took effect the same day.

The changes make clear that contracting officers can set aside orders for small businesses both on blanket purchase agreements under the General Services Administration’s Multiple Award Schedules and on multiple-award contracts.

The revisions add a new section in the FAR. It authorizes agencies to set aside one or more contracts for small business on a multiple-award contract, including any of the socioeconomic programs, such as the service-disabled, veteran-owned small business program.

Officials are hopeful for what the changes will bring to small businesses. at the Defense Department, GSA, and NASA expect agencies to take advantage of the set-aside revisions. They want agencies to identify possible multiple-award contracts through which they could set- aside orders for small businesses. They also want agencies to set aside more orders when using GSA’s Schedules, according to the notice.

The changes are based on law and an advisory group.

Congress included language in the Small Business Jobs Act, which became law in 2010, addressing set-asides among task and delivery orders.

Also in 2010, an interagency panel, which was created by President Barack Obama to study small-business contracting, found the issue needed some attention since multiple-award contracts have become so popular.

“There has been no attempt to create a comprehensive policy for orders placed under either general task-and-delivery-order contracts or Schedule contracts that rationalizes and appropriately balances the need for efficiency with the need to maximize opportunities for small businesses,” the Task Force on Small Business Contracting wrote in its report.

About the Author: Matthew Weigelt is a senior writer covering acquisition and procurement for Washington Technology. Published Nov. 3, 2011 at http://washingtontechnology.com/articles/2011/11/03/small-business-set-asides-multiple-award-contracts.aspx?s=wtdaily_041111

November 7, 2011 By AMK

Search is on for Gordon’s OFPP successor

During his two years as OFPP administrator, Dan Gordon worked on a variety of acquisition issues from improving and standardizing the workforce to pushing for more industry and agency communication through his “mythbusters” campaign.

Now, on the heels of the announcement that he will step down from his post for an associate dean position at George Washington University Law School, government procurement watchers are asking: What’s next?

The length of Gordon’s tenure — about two years — is comparable to that of other administrators in recent history, said former OFPP administrator Angela Styles in an interview on the the Federal Drive with Tom Temin and Amy Morris.

“It’s a hard job; it’s a 24/7 job,” she said. “And after a while, it wears you out.”

Styles, herself, stepped down as the head of the office in 2003, after about two-and-a-half years on the job.

There are “tough policy issues” to grapple with every day, she explained. And they often occur in the glare of the media spotlight, she added. “They’re really issues that are both substantive, regulatory issues and political and policy issues that come up every day.”

Gordon’s legacy

While an official date for Gordon’s departure hasn’t been set, the experts are already evaluating his legacy.

“I think he was a strong steady hand there,” Styles said. “I think he understood the acquisition workforce; he understood how procurement works. He showed that there can be a really strong leader in that job that can do it effectively, that can make very significant changes,” she added, citing, for example, his work on cutting back on the growth of multiple-award contracts.

Al Burman, a former OFPP adminstrator who’s now the president of Jefferson Consulting, pointed to Gordon’s efforts at bolstering the government’s acquisition workforce.

“We’ve had so many issues with workforce,” Burman said and Gordon said recognized “that we really need to beef up the folks that are doing this job.”

In September, OFPP announced it was revamping the position of contracting officer’s technical representative. The new position — which requires more training — will be known as a contracting officer’s representative.

Gordon has also earned high marks from industry.

Stan Soloway, president of the Professional Services Council, which represents many government contractors, praised Gordon’s “objective and reasoned approach.”

“Whether you agreed with him or not, he was a guy who would always seeks out lots of opinions — he’d listen, he’d respond,” Soloway said in an interview on In Depth with Francis Rose. “And I think he changed the tone of the dialogue in some very critical ways.”

Possible successors

So far, Styles said, there’s no obvious shortlist of obvious replacements.

But whomever is picked as a successor should have a substantive background in government contracts, she said. Previous administrators without that crucial quality have had a much harder time getting up to speed. And whomever takes the reins must be comfortable amid the political fights that the Office of Management and Budget, in which OFPP resides, is often at the center of. “For better or worse, OMB … is a highly political environment,” she added.

The White House will also likely consider picking a successor already in the administration, Burman said, citing the grueling vetting process job candidates will face from Capitol Hill.

“It’s a very difficult and time-consuming process,” he said. “So, trying to get somebody brand-new in and starting from scratch, I think, would be pretty difficult at this time in the process.” Burman said.

Soloway said the calendar doesn’t do the administration any favors.

Even under the best of circumstances it could be months before a candidate is vetted and approved, Soloway said. The chances of getting the administration’s pick confirmed — in an election year when Congressional politicking runs high — are very slim, he said.

And depending on the outcome of the 2012 election, the successor may never actually sit for the job.

“The timing just isn’t great,” Soloway said.

— by Jack Moore, Federal News Radio, Nov. 3, 2011 – http://www.federalnewsradio.com/?nid=517&sid=2617348

November 2, 2011 By AMK

Rep. Lankford says training will ease acquisition workforce transition

The federal acquisition workforce is getting younger and less experienced, and that worries Congressman James Lankford (R-Okla.).

The chairman of the Oversight and Government Reform subcommittee on Technology, Information Policy, Intergovernmental Relations and Procurement Reform said agencies need to do more to train new employees to make the best acquisition decisions.

“We interact with lot of contracting officers that are very dedicated employee as well as contractors that are trying to do the right thing, but there’s a lot of confusion right now, it seems, on what is the right [contract] vehicle to use,” said Lankford in an interview with Federal News Radio. “There seems to be a tremendous transition of individuals where we have new contracting officers or fairly inexperienced ones who are getting their sea legs in this and trying to determine what levels of risk can they take in interpreting some of these rules in the FAR. It’s an interesting time of transition.”

Lankford said vendors tell him their staff knows more about the acquisition rules than many of the contracting officers they deal with.

This dearth of trained acquisition workforce puts agencies at risk for misspending money, he said.

To that end, Lankford is proposing a series of hearings over the next few months to try to educate his counterparts that the “pennywise, pound foolish” approach many in Congress have taken over the years no longer is a good one.

“We get the best value for the taxpayer when the contracting officer and people involved in it know completely, have confidence in what they are doing, can look at all the different vehicles and make good choices,” he said. “We have to allow that contracting officer to look at it and make good, wise decisions, they are the voice of the taxpayer at that point.”

He said the challenge is getting members to understand the benefits of spending a little money to save a lot of money.

“CBO can’t score that. They can’t score a savings a money over potential of better training, better equipped,” he said. “We know it will happen, but at the end of the day when we actually are voting on a bill, they can’t show there’s a savings that we know it’s coming. That comes just through education.”

Two administrations and several members of Congress have tried to improve the training the acquisition workforce receives. The Office of Federal Procurement Policy tried to work with lawmakers to create a acquisition training fund for civilian agencies, similar to the one the Defense Department has for its employees. The administration requested $158 million in 2011 for an acquisition workforce training fund. Congress approved no funding for the fund in either of the last two years.

OFPP tried to go around Capitol Hill by issuing new certification requirements for project managers and contracting officer technical representatives.

OFPP also wants to grow the acquisition workforce by 5 percent by 2014.

The Federal Acquisition Institute found in fiscal 2009 —the latest information available — there were 106,506 employees classified in the 1100 job series or as project/program managers or contracting officer technical representatives.

FAI found the number of 1102s—contracting officers—increased by 3,200 from 2008 to 2009, and up 6,200 since 2000.

The survey also found between 12 percent-and-25-percent of all employees in acquisition workforce positions were eligible to retire in 2009.

Lankford may be getting some help in pushing for more acquisition workforce training.

The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee passed the Federal Acquisition Institute Improvement Act in June and is waiting debate by the full Senate.

Lankford said the goal is not to create a new bureaucracy for training, but make sure the people in the workforce are well trained.

As a part of training, Lankford said he’s also concerned about the proliferation of multiple award contracts and how they limit competition.

“A contracting officer is going to what’s safe and what they know will work and where they had previous people. If you continue to do multi-award, if you continue to pull on people who have done it in the past and who you know can get it done, it’s the least amount of work and it’s the easiest,” he said. “The challenge of it is how do we start raising up subcontractors into prime contractors? We have to continue to raise up a new generation constantly of subs to primes and we have to get best value. Best value may not be putting all of these things together. We need to be able to reward contracting officers for doing the additional work and provide some incentives for them to go around that because that will save the taxpayer dollar in the end.”

Lankford also wants agencies to use the suspension and debarment process more regularly as a tool to limit bad contractors.

He held a hearing in October on how agencies are using this process, and plans on continuing the subcommittee’s oversight of the process in 2012.

“HHS and DHS both have reports due to us by Christmas this year on their changes that are happening with suspension and debarments,” Lankford said. “Obviously, FEMA has a long way to go on this but they are active in taking that in. HHS, not so much. They’re one of the agencies that have not done suspension and debarments. They said during the hearing it’s their intention to get this done. It’s moving that from intention to actually accomplishing that. They have a tremendous amount of contracts. They can do it. It’s not too difficult. We just have to pay attention to it.”

— by Jason Miller – Federal News Radio – Nov. 2, 2011 – http://www.federalnewsradio.com/?nid=85&sid=2616224

Search this Website