Shows & Panels
- The 2014 Big Picture on Cyber Security
- AFCEA Answers
- Ask the CIO
- Connected Government
- Consolidating Mission-critical Systems
- Constituent Servicing
- The Data Privacy Imperative: Safeguarding Sensitive Data
- Eliminating the Pitfalls: Steps to Virtualization in Government
- Federal Executive Forum
- Federal Tech Talk
- Government Cloud Brokerage: Who, What, When, Where, Why?
- Government Mobility
- The Intersection: Where Technology Meets Transformation
- Maximizing ROI Through Data Center Consolidation
- Mobile Device Management
- The Modern Federal Threat Landscape
- Moving to the Cloud. What's the best approach for me
- Navigating Tough Choices in Government Cloud Computing
- Satellite Communications: Acquiring SATCOM in Tight Times
- Transformative Technology: Desktop Virtualization in Government
- Understanding the Intersection of Customer Service and Security in the Cloud
Shows & Panels
EPA experiences the upside of contracting reforms
Thursday - 7/8/2010, 6:42am EDT
By Jason Miller
Federal News Radio
The Environmental Protection Agency is using the money saved from changing the way it contracts for Superfund remediation cleanup services to fund other mission critical needs.
John Bashista, the director of EPA's office of acquisition management, says the savings enable the agency to meet needs that otherwise the agency would not have had money for.
EPA's savings come from the government-wide initiative to improve contracting through more competition and by using fewer risky contracts such as time and materials.
"When I go out and speak with the acquisition workforce and especially listen to the acquisition workforce, I hear people who are charged up and focused in way hasn't been true for years," says Dan Gordon, administrator of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy in an interview with Federal News Radio. "When we talk about the need, for example, to avoid sole source contracting, which are sometimes called one bid or no bid situations, I'm hearing real effort to get that competition out there and I think the acquisition workforce can make all the difference. You see same thing on cost reimbursement. For too long we've had situations where we do a contract using cost reimbursement pricing because the prior one was cost reimbursement and why was that one cost reimbursement, because the one before was cost reimbursement. In other words, we have too much inertia and not enough rethinking."
And it's that rethinking that is helping EPA-and other agencies-begin to see change in their acquisition cultures.
"I think the initiative really helped facilitate a more innovative thinking among agencies to get out of the paradigm or get out of box of doing things the traditional way," Bashista says. "I think it also heightened the visibility of the perspective that the acquisition workforce involves more than contracting officers and specialist, but does involve a wide variety of people--the program organizations have a role in the acquisition process, the budget folks, the legal counsel, finance folks--and from that perspective the initiative really helped to facilitate a broader thinking about how we approach acquisition."
He adds that EPA looked beyond OMB's requirements to see how they could take advantage of rebates through purchase cards or reutilization of excess property.
Chuck Gherardini, EPA's deputy director in the office of acquisition management, says his office used historical data to specifically identify the services needed and estimate what the cost would be for Superfund cleanup services.
In the end, more contractors competed for the work and that lowered the price, he says.
EPA estimates that it is paying 65 percent less under the firm fixed price contract than under the cost reimbursement type of contract previously used for these services.
Along with EPA, OMB highlighted the Homeland Security Department's use of reverse auctions to purchase commercial products. DHS says it paid $40 million less overall than it estimated it would pay.
The National Nuclear Security Administration acquired cybersecurity and IT services by splitting up one large contract into two smaller ones. NNSA received more competition and saved $22 million, or paid 15 percent less than previously for the same or better services.
And finally, the Defense Department and the Interior Department worked together to procure call center operation services where the price is based on the volume of calls and not a single fixed price.
Gordon says sharing lessons learned such as these is the way the administration plans on keeping the momentum going around the contracting reforms.
"This is really about changing the culture," he says. "As we strengthen our acquisition workforce, which is going on in every agency of the government right now, as we improve the training we give to the acquisition workforce, we are working hard to change the culture. To give you a concrete example, award fee contracts should absolutely not be used unless the appropriate criteria are met. That means they should be the exception and not the rule."
Gordon says the same goes for cost reimbursement and sole source contracts as well. He says getting contracting officers to recognize the limits is as much a culture change as anything else.
"Fiscal responsibility means using competition and that can be a slow battle," he says. "We are turning the tide."
Part of the evidence the administration points to in turning the tide is recent progress made by agencies in increasing competition and reducing the use of risky contracts.