In "Rising Tide: The Great Mississippi Flood of 1927," published in 1998, John Barry painted a compelling picture of the long-lasting changes that resulted not only from the great flood, but also from the ways in which the government responded to it and handled the recovery.
From the Section 1423 panel on services acquisition to the Defense Acquisition Performance Assessment Project, from the Quadrennial Defense Review to the deputy secretary of defense's "Acquisition Roadmap," there are an unusually large number of reviews of acquisition policy and practices. So many hearings -- but how much has been heard?
Recently, a Professional Services Council member company went through a contentious audit at one of its customer agencies. The audit centered on the company's billings for subcontractor costs, an increasingly common area of debate.
In 2001, Congress directed the Defense Department to create processes to better oversee its services acquisitions. A year later, Congress changed the rules under which DOD can access and use General Services Administration schedules and multiple-award contracts.
If ever the times demanded a culture of real innovation, that time is now. Tight budgets, ever-expanding missions and extraordinary human resource challenges have created unique and unrelenting tests for federal agencies.
At the sentencing of former Boeing Co. executive Mike Sears, who pled guilty for his role in the Darleen Druyun case, U.S. Attorney Paul McNulty announced the formation of a new procurement-fraud task force. This is just the latest example of how ethics in government contracting has drawn the spotlight as never before.
Later this month, the General Services Administration inspector general is expected to release the first of two reviews of the GSA Client Support Centers as required by the 2005 defense authorization bill. They follow the December 2004 report on the centers, done by the GSA IG, on the recommendation of GSA Administrator Stephen Perry.
In November, Congress finished two tasks many thought it wouldn't: work on all appropriations bills, thus avoiding a long-term continuing resolution, and the confirmation of David Savafian as the new administrator for Federal Procurement Policy. Both are welcome turns of events.
Since Sept. 11, 2001, there has been a steady stream of proposals to structurally and operationally reform the U.S. intelligence community. Now, with Congress and the president focused on implementing at least some of the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission, reform has gained new ? and possibly unstoppable ? momentum.
The "Get It Right" program launched by Stephen Perry, administrator of the General Services Administration, is designed to instill greater discipline in the management of GSA's multiple-award schedules and governmentwide acquisition contracts (GWACs).
David Savafian, administrator-select for Federal Procurement Policy, has committed to making the federal acquisition workforce a top priority. This is music to the ears of those of us who have been concerned about a diminished degree of top-level administration attention to this critical community.
Much of the buzz in the government acquisition community is about sections 803 and 815 of the Senate's version of the fiscal 2005 Defense Authorization Act. These sections would restrict the Defense Department's access to a wide range of nondefense multiple-award contracts.
The tsunami known as offshoring, or worldwide sourcing, continues to roll. I suggested in this space two months ago that Congress tread cautiously before acting on this complex issue. But March 4, by a vote of 70-26, the Senate passed an amendment authored by Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) that prohibits performance overseas of work covered under a federal contract for goods or services, and of work covered under a state contract or grant that uses federal funds.
It is often said that good people don't need laws to tell them how to act responsibly, while bad people always look for ways around the law. While we can establish norms of conduct, we cannot legislate behavior.
The issue of "offshoring" ? moving work from the United States to lower-cost locations overseas ? is taking off. Presidential candidates are talking about it; Congress has taken small steps toward banning it on federal contracts; and analysts of all stripes have weighed in with their perspectives.
In October, the Agriculture Department issued a report on its competitive sourcing program, from which one could infer that competition at DoA is, indeed, DOA.
