GovernmentExecutive.com

House Government Reform Chairman Tom Davis, R-Va., said he plans to monitor and possibly revamp the federal procurement process, which he contends needs to be better managed.

Davis is working with the administration to write legislation authorizing a plan -- already in the works at the General Services Administration -- aimed at correcting duplications.

Davis and GSA officials said the Federal Supply Service, which provides agencies with furniture and office equipment, and the Federal Technology Service, which dispenses computers, should be combined.

"The dual system made sense 20 years ago when IT investments were a relatively new phenomenon," a Davis spokesman said. "But now laptops and PC's are as ubiquitous as desks and phones."

Davis also is concerned about allegations of contract mismanagement at several GSA regional offices and would like to make it easier for the agency to recruit and retain employees, his spokesman said.

At a hearing on the issue last month, GSA Administrator Stephen Perry said the agency aims to complete the plan to merge the FTS and FSS by July. He said it would make it easier for federal agencies and contractors to use the system and eliminate the need to have separate accounting and administrative offices.

Government Reform ranking member Henry Waxman, D-Calif., said in a statement that while he planned to "keep an open mind," he was not sure consolidating the two agencies "seems like a natural fit." He said the move could de-emphasize technology procurement, making it more difficult for agencies to get up-to-date computers and other supplies.

A spokeswoman for Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Chairwoman Susan Collins, R-Maine, said she is unlikely to introduce any legislation on the issue but would "carefully consider any proposals sent over from the House" as well as plans submitted by GSA.

Collins sent a letter to Perry last month pledging to monitor the way the agency buys goods and services. She expressed concerns about a GAO report that found the agency could not provide documentation to show it was getting the best deal for the government.

COMMENTS

• Where is Shane Harris? This article reads like a press release. Pablo the Purchaser Posted April 13, 2005 2:28 AM
• Yes, by all means, revamp procurement policies again. I speak from experience involved in acquisition of IT resources. We were granted credit cards to make our jobs easier. Then a minor percentage of cardholders misused the cards in other agencies/activities, so we were all scrutinized. A finding on an audit done here found no intentional misuse, yet one of the findings was our statements did not have "tick marks" on them. I had to ask what that meant. The Approving Official is supposed to check off each item as he reviews it. The AO is usually a manager; how many managers have time to ensure they put a tick mark on a statement. Additionally cardholder and AO must sign 3 statements confirming that we used the card correctly and told the truth. It still costs over $200 in admin costs to purchase a $5 item. Now that's progress! One of our staff submitted a procurement request for a server, and the contracting officer is requiring her to write a sole source statement FOR EACH COMPONENT of the server. We have approximately 25 contactor personnel, who are extremely good at their jobs. They are paid a competitive salary, and the contract cost is fair and reasonable. Yet, we will have to recompete this contract due to existing law and procedures. I'm told not to worry because most times the incumbent contractor wins, and even if he doesn't the existing personnel have first right of refusal. Sorry, but that doesn't allay my managers' fears in the least. We've experienced being saddled with a low bid company. They hired a couple of the incumbent personnel to win the contract. Then those personnel were reassigned to a more lucrative contract (for the company), and we had to start over training a lower level, less experienced person. So, yes, please bring on the new rules. Everytime the process is streamlined and made easier, we end up with twice as much work. GovExec.com reader Posted April 12, 2005 7:20 AM