GovernmentExecutive.com

The number of federal employees providing information technology services for the Army Corps of Engineers will drop from a pre-competition high of 1,350 to 522, following the victory of an in-house team in a public-private job contest.

The Corps' strategic sourcing program manager, Ray Navidi, confirmed Monday that last week's announcement that the agency will move forward implementing the winning proposal, in which the government teamed with contracting giant Lockheed Martin Corp., will result in 522 positions for federal employees and 350 contractor positions. In a 2003 baseline study for the competition, the nationwide IT work was performed by 1,350 federal employees assisted by an estimated 1,400 to 2,000 contractors from more than 500 different companies, Navidi said.

Navidi said the number of federal employees performing the work has fallen to 890 as the result of a hiring freeze and a greater reliance on temporary and short-term workers during the nearly three-year competition process, carried out under the rules of the Office of Management and Budget's Circular A-76.

The transition to the new arrangements, slated to take place over the coming year, will dramatically overhaul how the Corps accesses IT services at 55 locations across the country, Navidi said. The plan shifts from a highly decentralized structure in which local offices performed much of their own administrative support work, to a more centralized model under which many positions are "virtual" slots that serve all offices.

The new system will also benefit from standardization, with common configurations and technology refresh cycles allowing IT support to be provided much more efficiently, Navidi said.

He said the competition is expected to save $950 million over six years. An Army Corps spokesman previously described this period as one transition year, one base year and four option years.

But a question-and-answer document distributed at a town hall meeting for affected employees described the structure and projected savings differently. According to that document, savings are expected to hit just $300 million, and those are stretched over a nine-year period of one phase-in year, a five-year performance period and three option years.

Neither Navidi nor public affairs officials returned phone calls Monday afternoon about the discrepancy.

The document says conducting the competition cost $13 million; Navidi said the first year, in which IT work is moved from the current setup to performance under the new arrangements, is expected to be costly. After this, the new approach is expected to begin to showing savings.

Navidi and the employee handout both described a complex process under which affected employees will be able to seek positions in the new setup.

Employees can compete for the new jobs under a "competitive reassignment" process, and can apply to work directly with Lockheed Martin. The Army's Priority Placement Program will be available to assign affected employees elsewhere in the agency, and voluntary retirement and separation procedures may be used to further reduce the number of unassigned employees. Lay-offs could be necessary as well, though Navidi said he was hopeful they would not be needed.

He said that over the next several months as the in-house team's now three-year-old work plan is reevaluated, more federal employee positions could be added. Unionized employees can retain their affiliations, but unions will have to restructure their relationships with management based on the new organizational structure.

Navidi said that in preparing its bid, the in-house team used a process similar to that laid out in federal acquisition regulations to select Lockheed Martin from among six competitors. The Corps will track costs and performance to ensure that the new team, which will operate as a largely independent entity within the Corps, meets its obligations, he said.

Navidi said he was legally prevented from discussing the terms under which an appeal by Northrop Grumman Corp., which lost to the in-house team in its bid to perform the work, was recently settled. That agreement allowed the Corps to move ahead with the IT work transition.

COMMENTS

• The problem started with the PWS (Performance Work Statement) it was flawed, and did not represent our actual workload and service levels. First sites were only given short deadline to provide the data, some sites only had weeks, others just a couple of months. The PWS did not contain all the data that was submitted by my site, even after multiple requests warning that data was missing or inaccurate. Now seeing a plan with a 60% cut on the workforce, I now see why Northrop took them to court. There is no way we can provide IT services with the numbers bidded. For example, each site is only afforded a single mailroom clerk regardless of the location size which is ridiculous Also the salaries being offered by Lockheed are laughable, even our existing contract employees are insulted by the wages & positions being advertised. Prepare for a mass exodus by both seasoned government and contract employees. GovExec.com reader Posted April 25, 2007 2:23 AM
• "Employees can compete for the new jobs under a "competitive reassignment" process, and can apply to work directly with Lockheed Martin." Gee, I wonder how many employees the Beltway Bandit Lockheed Martin will actually hire? I would guess = Zero employees. Quick, get that "Mission Accomplished" sign out of mothballs! FJ Posted April 24, 2007 10:24 AM
• How can their savings shrunk from $950M to $300M? Well, after you factor in the loss of 500 federal personnel over the last three years, the $13M cost of the defense of the selection, and inflation, I'm surprised they're going to save the $300M. Michelle Posted April 24, 2007 9:55 AM