Search FCW


Subscribe Now!
Table of Contents
Sprint
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
researchstore
resourcecenter
Sprint Communications for Continuity of Operations
Oracle Resource Center
NEW! Priority Report: Virtualization
GSA: Your Customer Service Agency
Government Leadership Survey
Green Solutions Guide
Report: Information Sharing
DISA IT Strategy & Vision
Emergency Preparedness Report
Report: Green Computing
PEO EIS Guidebook
Content Library

More >>



Latest News
ADVERTISEMENT





 

Speedy interagency contracts face possible new restrictions

By Matthew Weigelt
Published on October 29, 2007

Comment

Click here to comment on this article


Newsletters

You might also be interested in these FCW newsletters:

Daily
Policy and Procurement

To learn more, click here.


Interagency contracts appeal to contracting officers who are understaffed and under pressure to meet their agencies’ acquisition requirements quickly. But those contracts may lose some of their appeal if Bush administration officials and lawmakers impose stricter rules governing their use, federal contracting officials say.

Deidre Lee, director of management and chief acquisition officer at the Federal Emergency Management Agency, and other acquisition experts discussed changes in interagency contracting at an Oct. 17 conference sponsored by the Government Electronics and Information Technology Association. An interagency contract is one that an agency awards and lets other agencies use. Lee offered five reasons for the appeal of interagency contracts: time, staffing, revenue, flexibility and protests.
  • Time. “We’re in a hurry all the time,” Lee said. That impulse to get things done quickly isn’t unique to the acquisition culture, she added.
  • Staffing. In the early 1990s, the federal government decided the acquisition workforce was too large and cut back, Lee said. During that period, departments awarded interagency contracts so they could avoid time-consuming competitions that required a well-staffed workforce.
  • Revenue. Agencies that award an interagency contract can add a service fee, which brings in additional revenue. Lee said procurement offices need the revenue to provide customer support.
  • Flexibility. Lee called the flexibility of interagency contracts “our deep little secret.” Departments can store their appropriations dollars in an interagency contract to use at a later time. That flexibility gives officials additional months to formulate their acquisition plans, but under certain circumstances, it is illegal.
  • Protests. Interagency contracts limit the number of contractors that can receive task and delivery orders, and those orders cannot be protested.
The Bush administration and Congress now want to impose tighter regulations on those contracts.

Robert Burton, deputy administrator at the Office of Federal Procurement Policy, said overseeing interagency contracts is among OFPP’s highest priorities.

OFPP wants to improve oversight so the Government Accountability Office will remove interagency contracts from its High Risk List, Burton said. OFPP might require agencies to get OFPP approval for new interagency contract awards, he said.

However, even if new regulations cause agencies to reconsider their use of those contracts, one factor in their appeal may not be entirely lost, and that’s the speed with which agencies can award an interagency contract task order, Lee said. “We can now buy the wrong thing pretty fast.”


upcoming event

Enterprise Architecture 2008 - Washington, DC
September 9 - September 10, 2008

Occupational Health & Safety Executive Summit - Arlington, VA
October 6 - October 7, 2008


 

head
fcw
issue
First Name State
Last Name Zip
Title Email