YETMO

“Procurement Pains” (Week of August 7 - 11, 2006)

When I think about the growing importance of following proper procedures when contracting with private firms for government services, child birth contractions come to mind.

Such an association may at first seem quite bizarre, yet contraction (contracting) pains, which exist during the often painful procurement process, can result in the birth of a healthy, productive, and beautiful offspring.

So much news has been swirling around the media, Congress, and, of course, the Executive Branch about the ills and heartbreaks linked with many recent procurement actions. We’re reminded too frequently about companies awarded huge contracts, which seemingly don’t deliver promised goods and services. Today’s Washington Post [August 11, 2006] contains an article about Prince George’s County officials addressing apparent political shenanigans with some of their County Executive’s contract decisions.

This week’s piece is not simply about procurement abuses, however. I know what I read, but I don’t know the details. I wasn’t involved in these specific cases, and I realize some in the media have a need to sell newspapers or advertising space, so a portion of their reporting may not be as balanced and dispassionate as it should. Balance often leads to boredom. And boredom is, well, boring. By definition, it fails to capture anyone’s attention or concern.

I’m not accusing the Fourth Estate of intentional wrongdoing or harboring ill will towards private firms being compensated for work that not so many years ago was performed mostly by the hands of civil servants.

One good example deals with reports yesterday in The Washington Post that the same big four companies awarded billions of dollars in “no-bid” Department of Homeland Security (DHS) contracts were successfully selected in new, open-bidding competition. On the surface, that may appear odd, as the lingering smell of earlier sole source contracts is rather odious given that they reportedly grew exponentially over a relatively short period.

For all the poor publicity that such a development produces, it’s quite possible that these laboring leviathans may be the only companies with sufficient qualified staffing to perform the requested services.

Without being a shill singing private sector praises or a judge condemning process participants and calling for a return to the good ol’ days of pre-contracting out government, it appears that the Procurement (Contracting) system is either broken or managers are malfeasant in executing it, or some combination of both.

Many news accounts point to a lack of trained contracting officers and effective management oversight. At “The Forum” we’ve already acknowledged the importance of developing clear measures and assiduously monitoring them. Only through such clear expectations and tracking can the chances of success be reasonably assured.

Panels have examined this problem, and OMB is appointing a new Head of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy. The Executive Branch recognizes the attention and effort it must devote to this essential operational component.

We’ll continue to track this topic, as I’m sure it will remain newsworthy for many months (and years, I fear) to come.

We need you, those with knowledge and experience with contracting, to join in and enhance the dialogue among all key stakeholders inside and outside the government.

We await your input.