TOPICS

Managers discourage agencies from solo IT shopping

By Elizabeth Newell enewell@govexec.com November 5, 2009

Managers from the three agencies primarily responsible for governmentwide acquisition contracts on Thursday encouraged other agencies to take advantage of these setups, particularly for information technology purchases.

The managers -- representing NASA's Solutions for Enterprise-Wide Procurement for technology products, the National Institutes of Health's Information Technology Acquisition and Assessment Center (NITAAC) and the General Services Administration's numerous GWACs -- urged agencies not to develop their own contracts if a governmentwide arrangement would meet their needs.

"What we're battling every day is these [indefinite delivery-indefinite quantity contracts] being created in other agencies and departments," said Marcelo Olasoaga, deputy director for GWAC programs at GSA, during the National Contract Management Association's annual conference in Bethesda, Md. "If you want a program that is being run right and reporting to [the Office of Management and Budget], Congress and the [Government Accountability Office], we're the ones you need to be going to."

RELATED STORIES

SEWP program manager Joanne Woytek agreed, saying OMB performs hands-on oversight of the governmentwide contracts run by NIH, NASA and GSA. This is not necessarily true for multiple award contracts that other agencies manage, she said.

"We're the three agencies OMB watches over closely; we're not the ones GAO has issues with," Woytek said. "Their issues are with the ones that don't have that tracking and oversight. We've been doing this a long time."

According to NITAAC Deputy Program Director Robert Coen, using an existing contract also is much faster.

"We have efficiencies in place to fulfill requirements that can take six to nine months," he said. "But with a GWAC you can do these things so much easier. You don't have to get three bids... you'll get quotes back electronically within three days or less."

Another benefit is the decreased likelihood of bid protests under GWACs, Olasoaga said. In the past contractors weren't able to challenge these types of contracts. While that has changed, GWAC task and delivery orders are far less likely than other types of acquisition actions to end up in disputes, he said.

"We hold program management reviews quarterly and speak to awardees, and we tell them of the disadvantages of protests," Olasoaga said. "If it's necessary and they have to, it's their right and it's OK, but we work closely with industry and they are our partners. They understand that if they protest just because they didn't win and there is no good reason, it's not going to behoove them."

The relationships among awardees also make protests less likely, Olasoaga said. In many cases, even though companies compete against each other under the contract vehicle, they also frequently team up on proposals. Many companies understand that gratuitous protests would harm that collaborative relationship, he said. "It's almost like peer pressure for them not to do it," he noted.

VIEW ALL 6 COMMENTS POST COMMENT

COMMENTS

  • There are merits to some of the posts, but I think overall that agencies should not be continually creating new contract vehicles as this creates unnecessary redundancy and drives costs up. Once of the fundamental issues for this mentally is that all agencies think they are unique, and that they have unique services and interests. This falsehood is further exacerbated by the need to custom develop technologies to meet these unique requirements. I believe that using mature technologies, specifically COTS solutions, is ultimately the best option for federal IT procurements. Further, if requirements definitions could be done better, all the unique requirements fall off the table to the point where mature, commercial technologies can be procured to meet the needs of many of these agencies. This scenario allows the use of contract vehicles already in place (e.g. GSA Schedules and Alliant), which would in turn reduce procurement costs, and increase the chances of positive outcomes by helping standardize the way technology is purchased across the federal government. Jaime Gracia Posted November 14, 2009 3:36 PM
  • Mr. Olasoaga, if GSA contracts are essentially foolproof, then why is Steve Kempf, assistant commissioner for acquisition at GSA’s Federal Acquisition Service, saying that GSA knows that agencies’ acquisition employees are incorrectly issuing task orders on the Multiple Award Schedule program’s contracts and blanket purchase agreements (BPAs), which are under the same program? Why is GSA having to provide remedial contracting training for such an "easy" set of contracts? Stan Posted November 9, 2009 7:54 AM
  • "What we're battling every day is these [indefinite delivery-indefinite quantity contracts] being created in other agencies and departments," said Marcelo Olasoaga, deputy director for GWAC programs at GSA, during the National Contract Management Association's annual conference in Bethesda, Md. This quotation indicates that these agencies are battling competition even with agencies who prefer to protect their own interests by writing their own contracts. If something goes wrong with an order from another agencie's GWAC, there is no guarantee that the other agency will have the same interests as the issuing agency. Mr. Olasoaga's words also may indicate a conflict of interest between his agency's need to collect fees from other agencies and the best interests of the agency issuing the orders. From my nearly 25 years of experience in Federal contracting, I find that it takes as much care to issue an order from an existing contract as it does to issue my own contract. One size does not fit all, and it isn't as easy as saying "You don't have to get three bids." Depending on the fair opportunity provisions, you may have to get more than three, and in the case of IT services that involve software, NASA SEWP IV doesn't include any terms and conditions in the basic contracts for the software licensing, leaving it up to the issuing agency to negotiate adequate terms that protect the Government. Readers, remember the source of these words from NASA, NIH, and GSA, who are shopping for your funds in a not-so-altruistic way. Sometimes it is best to write your own contract, especially after reading the terms and conditions from the GWAC (if you can get a copy of the basic GSA contract - not the schedule- that is). I find it easier to get copies from the contractors of the basic GSA contracts. William Posted November 9, 2009 7:50 AM
VIEW ALL 6 COMMENTS

TODAY'S MOST POPULAR