requirements definition | The Contracting Education Academy

March 10, 2020 By cs

Agencies struggle with DevOps procurement

DevOps remains a “small pilot effort on a handful of applications” at many federal agencies, in part, because it requires accepting greater ambiguity in the procurement process, according to a new white paper.

**Click on the image above to download the DevOps white paper.**

ACT-IAC defines DevOps as an organizational philosophy where practices like the agile software development methodology are combined with tools to rapidly deliver IT apps and services.

ACT-IAC’s DevOps Working Group released a white paper last week compiled from survey results and hundreds of conversations with government officials. The paper includes case studies from agencies six agencies: the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, IRS, National Museum of African American History and Culture, National Park Service, and National Science Foundation.

DevOps has agencies seek potential solutions earlier in the development process than traditional procurement, when specific requirements aren’t known, which makes evaluating contracts more challenging, according to the paper.

Keep reading this article at: https://www.fedscoop.com/agencies-devops-procurement-challenges/

January 31, 2020 By cs

Army cancels $45-billion armored vehicle contest that drew one bid

The U.S. Army says it will reevaluate its effort to replace the Bradley Fighting Vehicle after just one company submitted a qualifying bid in the $45-billion contest.

**M2 Bradley Fighting Vehicle** (photo courtesy U.S. Army)

“Based on feedback and proposals received from industry, the Army has determined it is necessary to revisit the requirements, acquisition strategy and schedule before moving forward,” the Army said in a recently released statement.

The statement did not mention that only General Dynamics submitted an eligible bid. The Army disqualified a Raytheon-Rheinmetall team because it was unable to get its German-made Lynx fighting vehicle to the United States by Oct. 1. SAIC and Bradley-maker BAE Systems did not submit bids.

**The U.S. Army Futures Command is the Army command focused on modernization.**

Thursday’s decision is a setback for Army Futures Command, founded in 2018 to lead the modernization of the service’s weapons. But the Army did live up to Secretary Ryan McCarthy’s edict: “If you fail, we’d like you to fail early and fail cheap.”

After several failed attempts to buy new combat vehicles, the Army tried to fast-track the Bradley replacement, which it calls the Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle. But the speed helped contribute to its demise.

Keep reading this article at: https://www.defenseone.com/business/2020/01/army-cancels-45b-armored-vehicle-contest-drew-one-bid/162504/

January 7, 2020 By cs

DoD releases long awaited policy on mid-tier acquisition

After three years and a serious reprimand from Congress, the Defense Department finally released its guidance for the processes governing middle-tier acquisition.

***Click on image above to download document.***

The Dec. 30, 2019 instruction, signed by defense acquisition and sustainment undersecretary Ellen Lord, gives DoD agencies direction for when and how to use middle-tier acquisition, and explains leadership responsibilities for the contracting method.

The DoD guidance, at least temporarily, allays concerns from Congress and the Government Accountability Office about unclear oversight of middle-tier acquisition.

The document doesn’t really tell readers much more than is already known about the process, but rather codifies the way DoD uses it, and then leaves a large part of the way the method is used up to the individual defense agencies.

DoD explains that the Defense Acquisition University will create a companion guide in the near future to expand upon the guidance.

Keep reading this article at: https://federalnewsnetwork.com/contracting/2020/01/dod-releases-long-awaited-policy-on-mid-tier-acquisition/

October 30, 2019 By cs

Army’s acquisition boss on artificial intelligence and the evolving procurement process

As the U.S. Army begins to replace its existing fleet with fresh platforms that will form a force capable of countering adversaries across multiple domains and theaters, the acquisition side of the house will face tough choices.

**Army acquisitions chief Bruce Jette, center, receives a briefing on product improvements for cannon systems. (Photo credit: John Snyder, U.S. Army)**

Defense News posed a variety of questions to Bruce Jette — Army acquisition chief — ahead of the Association of the U.S. Army’s annual conference to see what he’s thinking about when it comes to the evolution of the service’s procurement approach, including its relationship with Army Futures Command, which is tasked with modernizing the service.

A year ago you were developing a framework for how you, as the assistant secretary of the Army for acquisition, logistics and technology, would interface with Army Futures Command. How has the framework evolved?

The framework for interfacing with Army Futures Command has evolved as we’ve identified unique, shared or overlapping responsibilities among stakeholders as well as sole responsibilities for each stakeholder.

The major muscle movements are: AFC has lead responsibility in the space between concepts creation and requirements definition, bringing “unity of command” to modernization organizations previously scattered across the Army. Unique to AFC is the responsibility to create concepts for how the Army will fight, and creation of the initial materiel requirement. AFC transitions to a critical supporting role after the concept and requirement refinement milestones, and is essential in collaborative efforts during acquisition activities leading to production. There are overlapping roles of capabilities to requirements throughout the development and procurement processes.

Keep reading this article at: https://www.c4isrnet.com/show-reporter/ausa/2019/10/14/us-armys-acquisition-boss-on-artificial-intelligence-and-the-evolving-procurement-process/

September 25, 2018 By AMK

3 big problems continue to dog federal procurement

Congress and the executive branch have worked for years to improve the quality of and reduce costs for federal acquisition, but some problems continue to hamper many agencies, according to a Sept. 12 Government Accountability Office report.

“Acquisition reform has been on everyone’s agenda for many, many years, decades. There have been proposals in the Congress, there has been changes to the regulations. This has been a very, very active area for a long time,” said Bill Woods, director on the Contracting and National Security Acquisitions Team at GAO, in an agency podcast.

The report evaluated federal agency acquisition improvements against 89 recommendations made by the Acquisition Advisory Panel in 2007 and divided the areas of improvement into three “buckets” that represent the acquisition life cycle: requirements and definitions; competition and pricing; and contractor oversight.

“One is in the requirements, definition process of actually deciding. What is it does the agency want? What does it need, and what’s the best way of getting what we need?” said Woods.

Keep reading this article at: https://www.federaltimes.com/acquisition/2018/09/17/3-big-problems-continue-to-dog-federal-procurement/

DevOps remains a “small pilot effort on a handful of applications” at many federal agencies, in part, because it requires accepting greater ambiguity in the procurement process, according to a new white paper.

The U.S. Army says it will reevaluate its effort to replace the Bradley Fighting Vehicle after just one company submitted a qualifying bid in the $45-billion contest.

After three years and a serious reprimand from Congress, the Defense Department finally released its guidance for the processes governing middle-tier acquisition.

As the U.S. Army begins to replace its existing fleet with fresh platforms that will form a force capable of countering adversaries across multiple domains and theaters, the acquisition side of the house will face tough choices.

Congress and the executive branch have worked for years to improve the quality of and reduce costs for federal acquisition, but some problems continue to hamper many agencies, according to a Sept. 12 Government Accountability Office report.

Search this Website