Search FCW


Subscribe Now!
Table of Contents
Business
BPM
CXOs
Columns
Columnists
Defense
E-Government
Elections 2008
Enterprise Architecture
Funding
Homeland Security
Health IT
IPv6
LOB
Management
Procurement
Privacy
Policy
Program Management
State and Local
Security
Technology
Telework
Workforce

More Topics
resourcecenter
Home
Letters to the Editor
Current Issue/Download
Print/Online Archives
Editorial Calendar
resourcecenter
Oracle Microsite
DISA Guidebook
GI: Network Mgmt
Green Computing
Tech Watch: COOP
PR: IT Security
Alliant Contract Guide
Tech Watch: Mobile IT
Content Library

More >>



Latest News
ADVERTISEMENT





 

Officials: Reconsider inherently governmental functions

By Matthew Weigelt
Published on March 12, 2008

Comment

Click here to comment on this article


Related story links

OFPP letter from 1992

GAO report on DOD contract management

What is inherently governmental?


Newsletters

You might also be interested in these FCW newsletters:

Daily
Policy and Procurement

To learn more, click here.


The government should consider revising the definition of inherently governmental functions in acquisition regulations, officials told a House subcommittee March 11.

“There’s a lot of flexibility in how one might define that term,” David Walker, the outgoing comptroller general, told the House Armed Services Committee’s Readiness Subcommittee.

Flexibility in the Federal Acquisition Regulation, which has the statutes for guiding governmental purchases, allows agencies to interpret the term’s definition in many ways, said Shay Assad, director of procurement and acquisition policy at the Defense Department. “It concerns me,” Assad said.
“I do think the time has come when we step back and take another look — a hard look — at how we’re defining 'inherently governmental,' ” Assad said.

Inherently governmental functions are generally define as tasks that private contractors cannot perform. It’s “a function that is so intimately related to the public interest as to mandate performance by government employees,” according to a 1992 policy letter from the Office of Federal Procurement Policy.

Some of those tasks may be sensitive, such as selecting employees for governmental jobs, or decisions may require discretion that only a government official has, such as being a voting member on a source selection board.

At the hearing, Rep. Solomon Ortiz (D-Texas), the subcommittee's chairman, asked the panelists about the proper roles of government and the private sector in conducting government operations. He said agencies are turning more to contractors to fulfill their core missions, and, as a result, has led to an increasing number of lead systems integrators.

The difficulty lies in determining which of the services that fall between these extremes may be contracted out, according to the OFPP letter.

“One of the things we’re grappling with today is the word ‘balance,' "  said Rep. Randy Forbes (R-Va.), the subcommittee’s ranking member.

Walker said agencies more often are going to contractors as a first resort to meet their needs, instead of considering contracts as one option to accomplish tasks.

Because of the increasing use of contractors, Walker said officials should reconsider a revision, adding, "The time has come to do so.”


upcoming event

Solution Seminar: Realizing the Benefits of Unified Physical and Logical Security Systems
May 6, 2008

Green Computing Summit 2008
May 20, 2008


 

head
fcw
issue
First Name State
Last Name Zip
Title Email