Hearing Of The Senate Committee On Homeland Security And Governmental Affairs - Achieving The President's Objectives: New OMB Guidance To Combat Waste, Inefficiency, And Misuse In Federal Government Contracting

Statement

A central debate in Washington is the size and scope of the Federal Government - what
it should do and how those missions should be accomplished. Although we in this
committee may not agree on exactly where that balance is, I would venture that it is a
universal sentiment that for every tax dollar the government spends, we must strive to
gain at least as much value for the American taxpayer. This is our duty, and although
the accomplishment of the federal mission is paramount, it is equally important to
ensure that every taxpayer dollar is well spent.
As a former businessman, I cannot help but see these two sentiments as inextricably
linked. Good government spends wisely. Like a successful business, government's
success relies on a good plan, measurable results, a capable workforce, and informed
leadership. I am pleased to see that the President and the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) recognize the importance of planning as they develop contracting
directives that are rooted in the measured and comprehensive legislation on contracting
reform passed by Congress in 2007 and 2008. Since the beginning of this month, when
OMB committed to releasing their new directives, I have been hopeful to find initiatives
rooted in the other two components of success -- a capable workforce and leadership.
Unfortunately, I could not find either in these new directives.
The central themes of these directives are good, but they are not new. In the past
several years, the Government Accountability Office (GAO), numerous reports of
Inspectors General and auditors across the federal government, the President's Council
on Integrity and Efficiency and, in 2007, the Acquisition Advisory Panel, have all
produced an extensive body of work that identified the same challenges for the federal
government in acquisition management. They have all identified a shortage of trained
acquisition personnel; the absence of effective competition, the lack of transparency in
many acquisitions, poor planning and oversight of contracts by agencies, and the
frequent inability, or unwillingness, of agencies to hold contractors accountable for poor
acquisition outcomes.
The recent OMB guidelines identify the same problems, but I am concerned that several
years after we found consensus on where our acquisitions capabilities needed to be, we
seem to be no closer to action. Reform has never been more urgent. Last fiscal year,
according to Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS),$525 billion was spent on
contractors who support the federal government's efforts to serve the American public.
Many have pointed out more than half of the acquisition workforce will be eligible to
retire within next several years. Currently, our acquisition workforce distribution looks
like an hourglass -- heavy on either end but light on people with 10-15 year experience.
From a business standpoint, this is not a healthy organization. Unless immediate and
drastic action is taken now, our capacity to do acquisitions in a comprehensive,
business-like manner will suffer over the next several decades.
After years of extensive analysis, I am eager to witness actual results. Effective action
begins with leadership, and I hope I find OMB taking the lead during this hearing when
addressing some of the questions I have, such as;
Why, in a unique moment of broad consensus on this topic over the past several
years, has effecting real change in acquisitions been so difficult?
How does OMB, through the Office for Procurement Policy (OFPP), plan to
produce and manage the guidance and metrics required by Congress and the
President timely and effectively?
The various contracting policy directive's requirement that each agency increase
competition and reduce its high-risk contracts is a step toward transparency and
competition. This initiative will rely on careful, informed analysis by all
components of the acquisition workforce. Workforce development is a pillar for
strengthened acquisition practices and improved performance. Without a well
trained and capable acquisition workforce, our federal contracting efforts will not
improve. Will the new OMB plan provide the needed vision and blueprint to turn
this around?
Integrity in the acquisition process is based on competition and transparency. This is
easy to say, but in the face of bureaucratic inertia, quite a challenge to produce. It relies
on a trained, professional, and appropriately sized acquisition workforce that is able to
make informed market-based decisions to bring best value to the federal government. It
also depends on strategic thinking at every federal agency, where clarity of mission,
accountability, and an emphasis on results can guide informed acquisition decisions.
I am encouraged by the broader emphasis on competition and the acquisition workforce
that these new directives carry. In government, however, it is too easy to deliberate in
working groups and believe that meaningful work was done. We should all be mindful,
when we speak of acquisitions policy, that every improvement we gain benefits the
soldier in the field, the law enforcement officer keeping us safe, or the public servants
safeguarding our health and wealth throughout the country. With them in mind, it is time
for us to take action and seek real improvement in contracting.

Source