TOPICS
TOPICS
From Nextgov.com: Navy awards nearly $500 million in task orders without competition
The Navy awarded nearly $500 million in engineering contracts without adequate competition, and the service did not ensure that the majority of the pacts met performance-based and quality assurance standards, according to a report released by the Defense Department's inspector general on Monday.
COMMENTS
- I do not believe this is a problem with the acquisition workforce. If you read the many GAO and DoD IG Report on DoD IT Acquisitions, you will find the fault is in the efficacy of the acquisition process (DoDAF, NESI, JCIDS) which must be tuned for the fast paced IT Market. It is also clear to most anyone who does not work in the Pentagon that more oversight is also the wrong answer. We need effective oversight and means of holding ALL stake holder accountable for their contributions to the success of the program. Michael Porter of Harvard had it right with his Value Chain work. Thus, neither acquisition effectiveness, transparency nor oversight can be effective if the methods and tools being used don't enable sound decision making. Check lists (NESI, POPS), don't work if they are not supported by a rigorous vetting of our requirements, service specifications or technology assessment. If DoD wants to fix the root cause of failure, I suggest they take a hard look at both the solution engineering resources and methods being used on these programs. DoD spends billions each year on FFRDC/SETA support (about 12% of a program cost), with almost no successes. FFRDC effectiveness is only reviewed every 5 years. Maybe we need to make sure that the fox is not guarding the hen house. John Weiler Posted May 14, 2009 11:04 AM
- The Navy wouldn't be in this situation if they had used GSA's 871 Professional Engineering Services Schedule, competing their task orders among at least three Schedule 871 contractors. Rather than using Seaport, Navy should be using the professional services GSA Schedules. Dave Clemens Posted May 14, 2009 10:36 AM
- I do not believe this is a problem with the acquisition workforce. If you read the many GAO and DoD IG Report on DoD IT Acquisitions, you will find the fault is in the transparency and efficacy of the acquisition process. Acquisition oversight cannot be effective if the methods and tools being used don't work. Most of the tools are simple check lists, which offer no solution engineering rigor. If DoD wants to fix this, I suggest they take a hard look at both the solution engineering resources and methods being used on these programs. DoD spends billions each year on FFRDC/SETA support to prevent wasteful spending. Fix the root cause and stop blaming the acquisition work force. John Weiler Posted May 14, 2009 10:01 AM
PROMO RIGHT: GBC
Advancing the business of government through analysis, insight and the sharing of best practices.
SPONSORED RESEARCH
Achieving a Greener Federal Government IBM
Federal Cybersecurity: Securing the Nation's Information IBM
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act: New Requirements for Tracking and Reporting Federal Workforce Data Kronos
Managing the Stimulus: A Candid Survey of Federal Program Managers Accenture and Microsoft
Improving Collaboration and Productivity in 21st Century Government: The Role of Communication for Government Executives Cisco
