TOPICS
TOPICS
OPM rejects GAO recommendation to rebid jobs site contract
The Office of Personnel Management is ignoring a recommendation from the General Accounting Office to consider losing contractors' bids to redesign the federal jobs Web site.
On Monday, OPM General Counsel Mark Robbins sent a letter to GAO announcing its decision to stick with the initial decision to award the contract to upgrade the site to Monster.com, despite the watchdog agency's recommendation to rebid it.
"When we put out the contract, we wanted to choose someone on a technical merits basis, not a cost basis," Robbins said Tuesday. "We wanted to make sure we had a partner on whom we can rely, and we are much more comfortable with the reliance factors with Monster.com."
The bidding imbroglio began in January when OPM awarded a 10-year, $62 million contract to Monster.com to upgrade the USAJOBS Web site (aimed at applicants seeking federal jobs), redesign Studentjobs.gov (aimed at college students and graduates seeking federal internships and jobs), and perform a number of other services.
Symplicity Corp., another bidder, protested the Monster.com contract award and in April GAO issued a decision recommending that OPM bid the contract again. OPM asked GAO to reconsider its recommendation, but GAO denied that request in May, saying in part that OPM did not evaluate bids on an equal basis.
"OPM's evaluation approach here created a situation where OPM was in effect comparing 'apples and oranges,' " GAO said in its decision.
According to Norm Enger, OPM's e-government program director, when the contract was awarded in January, OPM was not required to suspend the project until GAO rendered its decision. But in the interim, Monster.com has delivered a multi-million dollar software product, Enger said.
"We continued to work on the new Web site, and what's happened is we've spent $4.8 million," Enger said. "This is an e-gov initiative, it's part of the president's management agenda and with that there are very, very tight timetables in making these initiatives operational."
The large financial investment and firm schedule for implementing the Web site make rebidding the contract a costly option, Robbins said.
"The General Accounting Office recommended that we reopen the bidding process and that really is not practical at this point because we do have the product that we want, and we paid for it," Robbins said. "We could go back to the very beginning and start all over, but it would be a waste of the $4.8 million."
Agencies rarely choose to reject a GAO recommendation, according to that agency's general counsel.
"It is very unusual for agencies not to follow recommendations in bid protest decisions; they follow our recommendations something on the order of 98 percent of the time," said Daniel Gordon, associate general counsel at GAO.
But Robbins said OPM Director Kay Coles James brought in new procurement personnel to review the bidding process and asked the agency's inspector general to weigh in on the situation before she chose to stay with Monster.com.
"We're not doing this out of spite for the system. We have all due respect for the system. But we have an obligation to the taxpayer and to the president and the administration to get this up and running as soon as possible," Robbins said.
Because OPM rejected the recommendation, GAO must now send a report detailing the protest and the recommendation to the House Government Reform and Appropriations committees and the Senate Governmental Affairs and Appropriations committees, Gordon said.
House Government Reform Chairman Tom Davis, R-Va., is "deeply concerned" with OPM's decision to disregard GAO's recommendation because it jeopardizes and taints the federal competitive acquisition system, according to spokesman David Marin.
"A flexible, responsive, and impartial competitive acquisition system is critical to the government's need to leverage the best services and goods the private sector has to offer at fair and reasonable prices," Marin said Tuesday after a briefing by OPM officials.
Marin said once the report is received, Davis will review the options and make a decision on how best to move forward.
"Whatever decision is made - special legislation, recission, or something else altogether - the goal will be to protect the integrity of the federal procurement process, which OPM has sullied in this instance," Marin said.
In the meantime, OPM plans to move forward and launch the new and improved Web site in the next few weeks.
A Symplicity official expressed disappointment with OPM's decision and said company officials were exploring other options.
COMMENTS
- Hear, Hear, for IT Specialist, St. Louis. He or she has hit the nail on the head. OPM director Kay Coles James should be held accountable, but will she be? I find such actions suspicious. It makes me wonder whose nest is getting feathered by these actions. I suspect that somehow our right-wing extremist Kay James is working to advance the cause or agenda of the Heritage Foundation to which she and her husband are closely allied. The situation begs closer inspection. Food for thought. richard walker Posted September 5, 2003 11:46 AM
- The key to this story is that OPM is refusing to do as GAO recommends and that is to rebid the contract because in their first contract award OPM compared apples to oranges. All GAO is recommending is that OPM go back and redo correctly what should have been done the first time. This indicates to me that OPM is continuing to waste government taxpayers' money. First, when they incorrectly awarded a contract due to a faulty comparison. Second, when after another government enforcement agency became involved, they elected to "ignore" the recommendation. Third, in continuing with a potentially higher cost contract to complete a project, money could be wasted. This information, again indicates that the biggest problem in government is that we have managers who are not trained to manage their government offices for the benefit of the public sector, or if they are trained to do such, are not held accountable for their decisions. This situation is a perfect example of lack of respect for authority and enforcement agencies. When our government authorities allow such actions to occur without any actions, they may as well give up on any type of government reform. Because if you cannot enforce laws and rules, why are you making them? GovExec.com reader Posted July 28, 2003 11:35 AM
- PLEASE don't tell me this is going to be another outrageously expensive boondoggle like the TSP website "upgrade". I used to use the TSP website frequently - now I must avoid it to avoid the intense frustration the 'new' website provides (and not much else). The old TSP website was just fine and served all my needs, by the way. As a visitor to the OPM website, I can tell you it works perfectly fine as well. Period. No complaints, no problems. I got my current job via the perfectly well functioning OPM website. With the size of the budget deficit, I strongly urge the government to save the taxpayer's money and leave the OPM website alone. K Finn Posted July 23, 2003 11:42 AM
