Shows & Panels
- The 2014 Big Picture on Cyber Security
- AFCEA Answers
- Ask the CIO
- Building the Hybrid Cloud
- Connected Government: How to Build and Procure Network Services for the Future
- Continuing Diagnostics and Mitigation: Discussion of Progress and Next Steps
- Federal Executive Forum
- Federal Tech Talk
- The Future of Government Data Centers
- The Future of IT: How CIOs Can Enable the Service-Oriented Enterprise
- The Intersection: Where Technology Meets Transformation
- Maximizing ROI Through Data Center Consolidation
- Moving to the Cloud. What's the best approach for me
- Navigating Tough Choices in Government Cloud Computing
- The New Generation of Database
- Satellite Communications: Acquiring SATCOM in Tight Times
- Targeting Advanced Threats: Proven Methods from Detection through Remediation
- Transformative Technology: Desktop Virtualization in Government
- The Truth About IT Opex and Software Defined Networking
- Value of Health IT
- Air Traffic Management Transformation Report
- Cloud First Report
- General Dynamics IT Enterprise Center
- Gov Cloud Minute
- Government in Technology Series
- Homeland Security Cybersecurity Market Report
- National Cybersecurity Awareness Month
- Technology Insights
- The Cyber Security Report
- The Next Generation Cyber Security Experts
Shows & Panels
Agencies ignoring billions in savings from strategic sourcing
Thursday - 10/4/2012, 6:45am EDT
Agencies are missing out on billions of dollars in savings by not using strategic sourcing contracts, particularly when buying services, according to a new report from the Government Accountability Office. By not taking advantage of the government's volume buying power, departments are putting their mission goals at risk because of tightening budgets.
The GAO report found four agencies, which account for 80 percent of the total procurement spend across government, weren't taking advantage of their volume purchasing power and lacked specific metrics and guidance for what to buy through these deals.
"Perennial high spend areas such as services offer the biggest potential for savings but have been largely ignored in strategic sourcing efforts," according to the report. "Focusing only on low risk, low return strategic sourcing strategies diminishes the government's ability to fully leverage its enormous buying power and achieve other efficiencies. Until top-spending federal entities, especially the Defense Department and the Federal Strategic Sourcing Initiative program, better incorporate strategic sourcing leading practices, increase the amount of spending through strategic sourcing and direct more efforts at high spend categories, billions of dollars in potential savings may be missed, denying agencies a valuable tool for maximizing their ability to carry out critical missions under tight budgets."
Auditors reviewed the use of strategic sourcing by DoD, the departments of Energy, Homeland Security and Veterans Affairs, and the Federal Strategic Sourcing Initiative (FSSI) between August 2011 and September 2012.
Governmentwide spend, savings low
These four agencies spent $388 billion on acquisition in fiscal 2011. GAO found only DHS spent 20 percent of their budget through strategic sourcing contracts and saved about 2.3 percent. DoD spent 5.8 percent of its budget through strategic sourcing vehicles, but saved only 0.06 percent. Energy used these volume buys for 9.3 percent of its acquisition budget, and saved 1.34 percent, and VA spent 1.4 percent of its budget through strategic sourcing, saving 0.32 percent.
Of the $537 billion spent on acquisition governmentwide, agencies spent 5 percent of their budgets through strategic sourcing with a savings of 0.4 percent.
"This percentage of managed spending and savings is very low compared to leading companies, which generally strategically manage about 90 percent of their procurement spending and achieve savings of 10 to 20 percent of total procurements annually," GAO wrote. "However when strategic sourcing contracts were used, selected agencies generally reported savings ranging from 5 percent to over 20 percent."
All four agencies are taking steps to strategically source more goods and services.
For example, GAO reports the Navy plans to set up a strategic sourcing contract for engineering and technical services.
Additionally, the Air Force, the Navy, DHS and VA have instituted policies requiring the use of strategic sourcing contracts. GAO says it's too early to tell if these mandatory policies are having an effect yet.
The Office of Management and Budget received recommendations from the President's Management Advisory Board in September to strategic sourcing mandatory for all agencies. OMB acting Director Jeff Zients hinted that is something the administration would consider.
The Air Force, however, said by promoting the use of FSSI through the use of random calls to its contracting officers, the use of the office supplies vehicle increased by 50 percent from March to April 2011.
SmartBUY 2.0 coming
GAO also reviewed the FSSI initiative led by the General Services Administration and the Office of Federal Procurement Policy.
Auditors say GSA and OFPP applied the lessons from the first strategic sourcing contract for office supplies to the latest attempt and found a spending increased to 13 percent in 2011 from 1 percent in 2009. GAO says agencies spent $202 million through the office supplies vehicles and saved about $24 million last year.
GAO said GSA is creating a SmartBUY 2.0 version to incorporate the software buying initiative into FSSI.
"The FSSI Program Management Office plans that going forward, FSSI SmartBUY will develop strategies to address all large software publishers," the report stated.
GAO didn't address the impact of strategic sourcing on small businesses, or whether the contracts affected competition across the government.
Some claim strategic sourcing doesn't save money and actually does more harm than good.
Sam Bornstein, a professor of accounting and taxation at Kean University in Union, N.J., and a partner with consulting firm Bornstein & Song, criticized GAO's findings, specifically around the FSSI program for office supplies.
"[T]he damage that this program has caused for a significant number of small businesses and the resulting jobs that have been lost, it is critical to evaluate the impact of strategic sourcing on employment along with the displacement of small businesses that will result from the restriction of competition," he said in an emailed comment. "Merely seeking out a lower price is short-sighted if there are unintended consequences which will result in job loss in an 8-plus percent unemployment environment. Strategic sourcing at this time may hurt rather than help the economic recovery."