Paper outlines practical steps to improve contracting

A panel of government, private sector and academic leaders this week recommended that the Obama administration consider six procurement reforms, most of which would not require Congress' approval.

The advice, outlined in a report released on Wednesday, included giving agency chief acquisition officers more authority and refining workforce planning. An acquisition reform working group convened by George Mason University's public administration program and the IBM Center for the Business of Government developed the recommendations during a series of meetings in 2008; Timothy B. Clark, Government Executive's editor in chief, was a participant.

"These are concrete solutions that would not take a lot of time or legislation," said the paper's lead author, Allan Burman, a contracting professor at George Mason University and head of the Office of Management and Budget's Office of Federal Procurement Policy during the Clinton administration.

With more than $500 billion -- about two-fifths of federal discretionary spending -- now being spent on contracts, procurement reform can no longer wait, Burman wrote.

"Many observers feel the federal government's contracting system is broken, mired in cost overruns, accountability lapses and questionable outcomes," the report stated. "In addition, those operating within the system see the environment as 'toxic,' characterized by fear and mistrust, and with oversight bodies such as agency inspectors general second-guessing their every action."

The group said the chief acquisition officer position, created in the 2003 Services Acquisition Reform Act, has failed to meet expectations. The authors of the 2003 law intended for CAOs to play a role similar to that of the Defense Department's undersecretary for acquisition, technology and logistics, advising agency heads on broad business and acquisition strategies, according to the report.

But, "There is no one either in the individual civilian agencies or looking across all the agencies that has the overall responsibility and authority to hold program management staff and contracting staff accountable for working together to get the best business results possible," Burman wrote. "It should be the responsibility of this chief acquisition officer to see that the acquisition management function is adequately resourced, as well as to ensure that effective strategic planning is being done. That is not happening."

These problems, Burman said, are compounded by the fact that CAOs frequently hold several titles and carry a multitude of responsibilities unrelated to acquisition. The report concluded that CAOs should be placed in charge of contracting and program management, including developing requirements for awarding contracts and assessing contractor performance.

The working group also called for changes to the acquisition workforce.

The government now spends less to manage its contracts on a percentage basis than at any point in its history, Burman wrote in an earlier briefing document. This lack of funding, he said, has led to inadequate training; gaps in mid-level management, stovepiped operations; and salaries that have failed to keep pace with the private sector.

"Today's acquisition environment does not present a pretty picture," he said. "The working group felt that government leaders need to move from studying the problem to actively addressing it."

To beef up the contracting workforce, the panel recommended providing agencies with greater direct hiring authority, designing recruitment programs to lure more mid-career leaders and establishing succession plans to cope with impending retirements.

Other recommendations included:

* Designating career executives as deputy CAOs to ensure greater coordination of agencywide acquisition functions;

* Developing a human capital strategic planning process that takes into account the government and contractor resources needed to accomplish the agency's mission;

* Establishing a new business council that reports directly to the head of every civilian agency. This council would be chaired by a deputy secretary and include the agency CAO, chief financial officer, chief information officer and chief human capital officer. Each chief would be given an equal vote on internal human resources, operational, programmatic and funding issues;

* Changing the mission of OFPP so the office has governmentwide responsibilities parallel to those of agency CAOs. This is the only recommendation that would require legislation, according to Burman.