A new GSA Office of the Inspector General report reviewing the agency’s oversight of performance-based contracts found:
“…while the Federal Acquisition Service has established an internal policy intended to improve contract administration, the policy’s effectiveness could not be determined because Federal Acquisition Service contracting personnel were not complying with the policy.”
This statement could actually have been written about a variety of GSA policies. It points up a larger problem that GSA contractors face every day: the disconnect between what a policy says and how it is actually implemented. Anecdotal evidence supports the IG’s performance- Read more
Over 1,000 False Claims Act and whistleblower (known as qui tam) cases were resolved in FY’22, the second-highest number of FCA cases ever and a substantial increase in qui tam actions. Although total monetary recoveries dipped to $2.2 billion, it’s clear that contractors need to take compliance seriously. The 652 qui tam resolutions should perhaps be the biggest flag for contractors. These are suits often filed by disgruntled current or former employees, competitors, or even someone just looking to make a fast buck. Regardless of whether any Read more
One of the major criticisms government customers have about contractors is that they tend to be way too reactive. While contractors may take that with some justifiable irony from a customer that is typically risk-averse, the basic point is a good one. Way too often companies, especially larger ones, get so caught up in the preparation process that they miss the opportunity for action. A former boss of ours called this “the great overthink” or “preparing to prepare”. While there is certainly a benefit to conducting necessary research and meeting Read more
One of the many famous lines from the movie “The Princess Bride” is “You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.” Just as with the movie characters, contractors need to remind themselves that words do not always have the same meaning in the government market as they do elsewhere. “Innovation” is one such word. Innovation gets a lot of promotion in federal agencies. People talk about innovative solutions and innovative acquisition methods quite a bit. To be fair, there are some real pockets of both types of innovation in government. For the most part, though, contractors need to remember that Read more
Both industry and government officials are expressing concern over a proposed rule that would require every company selling software to federal agencies to provide a “self-attestation letter” declaring that a product adheres to National Institute of Standards and Technology guidance. We previously flagged the proposed rule for having the potential to substantially increase paperwork and overhead. Both government offices and contractors seem to now be paying attention and agree with us, according to a recent article in Bloomberg Government. NASA SEWP Program Manager Joanne Woytek expressed the concerns of some in government saying that the impetus behind the rule is “admirable”, but that it needs to be made “scalable and doable.” “We’re going to work as best we can,” said Woytek at a recent event, “working with GSA and NIST and others to determine what this policy means and how it might actually operate in a world in which there is not 10 companies but many thousands of companies selling software.” One industry group is pushing for the adoption of a single, standardized form through which attestations can be submitted. GSA does plan to use a Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency form that it expects to be available before June on GSA’s website.
This underscores a larger problem with which contractors should be concerned: GSA’s seeming disregard for the regulatory process. While the software rule is still technically in the proposed stage, GSA has indicated that it will begin requiring attestation letters in June, potentially moving forward before a rule is finalized or even modified. Other perceived “goods” are being incorporated into contracts and becoming requirements prior to a rule being issued or made final as well. The agency, for example, is performing an end-run around the Green House Gas rulemaking process by making compliance with industry standards a way to earn extra points on the Alliant III contract. Since it can’t require companies to meet a rule that doesn’t currently exist, it is offering a carrot approach instead. This, of course, will mostly benefit larger companies who are already aware of the pending rule and have the infrastructure to support it. Contractors may want to ensure that their internal and external representatives make any concerns with the bypassing of the rule making process known to GSA, OMB, and Congress.