TOPICS
TOPICS
House contracting caucus tackles acquisition workforce issues
A bipartisan congressional panel on Tuesday will discuss how to improve the federal acquisition workforce.
Hosted by the Smart Contracting Caucus, the open event will feature leaders in the contracting sector, government watchdogs, agency leaders and independent procurement officials. Participants will focus on providing the government's acquisition workforce with the tools, training and resources necessary to ensure that taxpayer dollars are spent wisely.
"Effective contract management gives the federal government access to cost-effective and cutting-edge private sector innovation," said Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee and a member of the caucus. "A lack of resources for contracting officers and the acquisition workforce, however, leaves the government susceptible to costly mistakes."
Caucus leaders said they are laying the groundwork to reform the entire acquisition process, rather than adding layers of oversight after contracts are awarded.
"Congress often spends its time examining high-profile slip-ups rather than on improving the acquisition process," Issa said. "Tuesday's event will help identify the ideas that can make the federal acquisition system operate more efficiently and transparently."
Nearly a year ago, Rep. Tom Davis, R-Va., then the ranking member of the government oversight panel formed the caucus to educate colleagues about the contracting process and to broker bipartisan solutions for procurement reform.
Davis did not run for reelection in 2008, and Issa has become the leading Republican voice on the 11-member caucus. Rep. Chris Carney of Pennsylvania, the chairman of the House Homeland Security's Subcommittee on Management, Investigations and Oversight, is among the leading Democrats on the panel.
The caucus is a congressional member organization registered with the House Administration Committee. Tuesday's forum will be the group's first public event.
Panelists will include John Needham, director of acquisition and sourcing management issues at the Government Accountability Office; Steve Kempf, assistant commissioner of acquisition management at the General Services Administration's Federal Acquisition Service; Max Stier, president and CEO of the Partnership for Public Service; Alan Chvotkin, executive vice president of the Professional Services Council; Scott Amey, general counsel of the Project On Government Oversight; and Steven Schooner, co-director of the government procurement law program at The George Washington University Law School.
Issa and other caucus members also will address the forum.
COMMENTS
- All Contracting Officers are not bad. We have experienced top notch CO's that work diligently for the govt and try to help small business too. We have to stop those CR's that only want to award large contracts to big business because they believe it makes their work easier. On the contrary Small Business is easily accessible and can provide better service for a much lower cost. michelle Posted May 26, 2009 11:02 AM
- Wow Observer, I am glad I don't work for your agency. As a contract specialist, mine is tough enough. Requirements vague or ever changing, while at the same time asking for a set delivery date. CR's that produce the majority of the funding the last 3 months of the FY, then Washington asking why we haven't spent the money yet, and pulling teeth to get the technical people on your team to answer questions. We are the babysitters of the government, the placators, the overworked and under appreciated. We are also highly skilled, have education and continuing education requirements and certifications. We enjoy our work and get satisfaction from doing the job well and within regulation. Most of us are not the problem, but we seem to be the only ones where the buck stops if the schedule is slipping. Step into my shoes. a taxpayer and a federal worker Posted May 22, 2009 1:34 PM
- Just to add some balance to these well meaning illustrations and proposals: do we ever notice acquisition professionals looking in the mirror? Are they competent? Do they strive to understand their customers and their sources? Are they using all the purported "pressures" to excuse themselves from having a spine and doing their job, or are they just supposed to be a nonthinking stapler and email forwarder? Might as well grade them GS4 if so. Having dwelled in the belly of the best for a few decades--and seen all the ills recounted in the caucus and by people on the front lines, I can only remember one person who suffered career stall or reversal because of holding the line, doing her job, and having a spine. I think the contracting officers and specialists protest too much, by far. As for the other kind of acquisition professionals in the program offices, they are programmed to produce the kind of defective and changing requirements they always produce and to lowball their cost estimates. Adding more staff won't help them--they will only produce more artful defective requirements and cleverly disguised lowball cost estimates. Lack of staff is not the problem. Raiding the public purse is the problem. This is where waste and taxpayer abuse come in, and it is too bad this is not the crime that fraud is; pardon me, most frauds, like FCA cases, are "civil"!!! Note that civil servants are instrumental in making this happen; we can't blame it all on contractors. So, sure, get more staff, but don't expect it to make improvements without honest leadership--not just in the political ranks, but in the career bureaucracy. We are our own worst enemy, forever seeking someone else to blame things on. And why on earth is it so important to academics to preserve the fiction that the procurement system is not broken? The evidence is all around us and is decades old. Regardless, the WH says it is broken and is acting accordingly. Observer Posted May 21, 2009 8:09 AM
