President Biden nominated Missourian Robin Carnahan last week to be the next Administrator of the General Services Administration.  Carnahan comes to the position from Georgetown University where she co-founded the State Software Collaborative.  Carnahan also founded and led GSA’s 18F state and local consulting practice from 2018-2020.  The new Administrator-designee will face several challenges upon Senate confirmation.  Here are three that may become a focus, whether or not they’re part of the original plan: 

1.  Coordinating GSA’s technology and service portfolios:  GSA’s technology operation is a booming business.  The Schedules program, Alliant, StAR’s and other current programs are popular.  Right behind them are ASTRO and Polaris.  At the same time, the service portfolio is experiencing solid growth with the Professional Services Schedule and OASIS.  Coming soon will be the OASIS follow-on.  Keeping those programs growing without running into each other will be an increasing challenge.  So, too, will ensuring that new contracts are as popular and easy to use as existing vehicles. 

2.  Managing all of GSA’s seemingly competing acquisition methods:  The Federal Acquisition Service has the Schedules program, GWAC’s, the commercial E-Marketplace pilot, its own in-house requisition channel, and more.  Each serves a specific constituency and each has its detractors, as well.  Keeping the lines clear of how each portfolio can serve a specific customer type will be critical in terms of outward facing actions.  Ensuring that all GSA professionals work toward a positive strategic outcome at the agency level will be especially important internally. 

3.  Dealing with expiring commercial leases and a down-sizing federal office footprint:  No GSA Administrator can avoid Public Building Service issues.  Carnahan’s tenure would be no exception as 60% of the agency’s leases will expire between 2019-2023.  Figuring out how much space will continue to be required in the wake of a now decentralized workforce could make rocket science look easy by comparison. 

One area NOT to focus on?:  In our 30 plus years of federal acquisition experience, state and local governments have been very, very wary about “solutions” coming from their federal counterparts.  While coordinating federal, state, and local acquisitions may seem like a good strategic goal, it is fraught with political landmines, rice bowls, and other potential snares.  A substantial amount of capital could be expended on this front with little or nothing to show for it.  Resist the urge to make integrated acquisition across government lines an initial focus.

President Biden has nominated Michael Brown, the head of DOD’s innovation arm, to be the next Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment (A&S).  Brown’s job at DIU focused on rapid prototyping and acquisition, but he also has a strong private-sector background.  His nomination, along with those of other senior acquisition leaders, indicates a strong preference for people with solid technology backgrounds and a desire for moving quickly to implement new solutions in that area.  The GSA Administrator-designee, Robin Carnahan, has a similar tech background and her FAS Commissioner, Sonny Hashmi, is a former Chief Information Officer.  The Administration clearly believes that the tech sector can bring lessons learned into the realm of acquisition.  Brown’s innovation unit has been hailed by many for bringing new companies into the defense supply chain and for sponsoring innovative technologies. They key now will be to try and implement those successes on a much larger scale.  Brown also brings with him a strong cybersecurity background from his time as CEO of Symantec.  Cyber remains a hot button issue and getting advanced solutions into the hands of DOD users more quickly may be a prime focus area for the new Undersecretary.  Current defense contractors may want to position themselves accordingly and be pro-active with ideas on how to bring innovative acquisition to more types of DOD projects than those Brown has previously worked on.  Being seen as both tech-forward and agile on acquisition may provide opportunities for industry to work more closely with the new DOD team. 

Whether it’s NASA announcing a new cyber and personal security contract, DISA’s new DES contract, JEDI, or even two new projects at the IRS, there seems to be a trend back to single award contracts, at least for large government projects.  Single award contracts were the predominate contracting method until the mid-1990’s when the use of multiple award IDIQ contracts proliferated.  The idea was to drive better solutions through consistent competition among qualified companies. Further, both legislative and regulatory requirements limit the use of “contract bundling” to roll multiple needs into one large vehicle, thus making it more difficult for small businesses to participate.  The Biden Administration has indicated that it wants to further strengthen such prohibitions.  In the meantime, though, at least some agencies are reverting back to large, “winner take all” procurements.  The premise may be that it is easier to manage one contract and contractor, especially for enterprise-wide requirements.  Assuring a common security posture may be a specific driver.  One thing that such contract vehicles also ensure, however, is protests.  Protesting to try and get your company another look is a minor incremental expense when a company spends upwards of seven figures in bid and proposal costs and knows they’re either going to be “in” or “out”.  Contractors may need to adjust their overall approach to federal business if single award contracts increase in popularity.  Establishing relationships with key customer contacts as early as possible will be especially critical.  So, too, will be the ability to suggest acquisition provisions that could give the company an edge when an RFP or RFQ hits the street.  It’s too early to tell whether single award contracting will spread to more and smaller projects, but it is not too early to be prepared if it does.