Skip to content Skip to left sidebar Skip to right sidebar Skip to footer

Government Contractor’s Blog

Government Contracting Automation?

Recent survey results of federal acquisition senior procurement executives and chief acquisition officers provide a window into the world of government procurement and what should occur over the next few years, according to Kraig Conrad CEO of the National Contract Management Association (NCMA), who conducted the survey. (Federal News Network, January 7, 2020)

According to NCMA, the three major findings from the survey are:

  • The role of the contracting officer is changing
  • The business of contracting is changing.
  • The workforce is changing.

The survey found that respondents are looking to shorten the procurement cycle while giving the Contracting Officer the ability to be less restricted and able to focus on providing solutions as opposed to getting mired in the routine administrative tasks. According to Conrad, the acquisition professional should see their role as a solution maker and not a compliance “police” officer, which ultimately limits the Contracting Officer’s impact. (ibid)

One element that threads itself through all of the findings is the need for top cover from agency executives to allow contracting officers as well as program managers the leeway and freedom to try different things and bring new ideas to the table. Conrad gives the example of the Air Force pitch days, in which 51 contracts were awarded to companies that have little or no experience with the military. The service doled out $3.5 million to those small businesses on a Wednesday — each in 15 minutes or less. The first installments of the companies’ contracts were in their bank accounts almost immediately. (ibid)

Conrad noted, “we heard from a lot of our senior procurement executives that in an environment where they feel they have top cover, the risk aversion conversation is easier to overcome. Otherwise, you will go right back to the same old model where everyone is trying to protect themselves. That top cover really only comes when someone in a leadership structure is not afraid to get in trouble. You run into situations where the senior leadership doesn’t feel they are covered or protected. It will take leaders stepping out and leaning over these challenges to be able to open challenges for their workforce.” (ibid)

Another area of impact on federal acquisition is technology. The survey white paper states “Several senior leaders even described a future in which an encyclopedic knowledge of the rules and regulations will be devalued as artificial intelligence further automates their application to acquisitions or incorporates regulatory provisions and requirements into contracting app algorithms.” (ibid)

According to Conrad, “we need to get better at how we train into the workforce. Those that have data science understanding need to tell a really good story with data. How are the contracting officers the solution makers? That really comes down to competency. What is those balance of skills that will allow someone to be competent as a business leader in this function? That is one of the areas, because of technology advances, that the technical components will soon be outweighed by the software skill needs.” Conrad feels the “softer skills” include a baseline knowledge of the actual problem/mission, products, and their related markets. (ibid)

Most senior leaders interviewed expect a shift from tactical to strategic work as technology is used for repetitive or routine tasks. It’s expected that many administrative tasks, for example, contract modifications, will become fully automated. Some senior leaders look to AI to further automate regulatory provisions and requirements into contracting app algorithms. (ibid)

Conrad expects to meet with federal acquisition leaders to discuss the survey results and begin the process of changing the role of the contracting officer.

Wondering if this will affect how you work with a Contracting Officer? Give us a call.

 

Open Ratings Closed

Open Ratings stopped accepting new orders for Past Performance Evaluations as of Friday, 6 December 2019. All Multiple Award Schedule (MAS) offerers must now demonstrate a sample of past performance by using one of the methods outlined by the solicitation:

  1. verify in eOffer there are three or more CPARS assessment reports that meet the solicitation criteria outlined in SCP-FSS-001 (j)(2)(ii)(A) or
  2. submit a past performance record and list of customer references as outlined in SCP-FSS-001 (j)(2)(ii)(C) when the offeror does not have CPARS assessments that satisfy the solicitation criteria in SCP-FSS-001 (j)(2)(ii)(A).  GSA will contact all customer references and request they complete a past performance questionnaire. Note – offerors should not upload completed past performance questionnaires with the MAS offer. (GSA Interact, December 18, 2019)

An offeror’s demonstration of past performance is limited to the methods spelled out in the solicitation. Additionally, GSA will not accept Dun & Bradstreet reports in lieu of the Past Performance Evaluation prepared by Open Ratings. Any offerors who ordered an Open Ratings Past Performance Evaluation on or before December 6, 2019, can use SCP-FSS-001 (j)(2)(ii)(B) to demonstrate a pattern of Past Performance if the Open Ratings Past Performance Evaluation uploaded to the offer is dated within one year of the offer submission and the offeror had no CPARS assessments that satisfied the solicitation criteria as spelled out in the SCP-FSS-001 (j)(2)(ii)(A). (ibid)

Is this all perfectly clear? If not, give us a call and we can walk you through the steps to demonstrate the acceptable Past Performance for a MAS offer.

You Are an Unique Entity!

You’ve heard (ad nauseum, probably) about replacing your DUNS number with the unique entity identifier (UEI) by  December 2020. Contractors will request and be assigned the new identifiers through SAM.gov. (To learn more about the transition, click here.) (GSA Interact, December 10, 2019)

Contractor award data, including UEI data, interfaces with many systems outside of the government interface. To assist contractors as well as other agencies, GSA published a first and second set of UEI/EVS specifications. For instance, Group 1 includes:

  • beta.SAM Entity Management. APE has updated schemas for a second version of the API. The second version allows  systems to pull information automatically. Differences between versions are marked as v1 (current version) or v2 (future version). Specs may be found here.
  • New EVS and UEI changes will not be updated to SAM Entity Management Web Services. Users of this web service should migrate to beta.SAM Entity Management API to retrieve UEI and new EVS information. 
  • The SAM public RESTful API will not be updated to incorporate UEI or new EVS changes. Users of RESTful API should migrate to beta.SAM Entity Management API to retrieve new EVS and UEI information.

Group 2 includes:

  • The beta.SAM Exclusions. API has updated schemas for version 2, which allows interfacing systems to pull information about the exclusions automatically.  Differences between the versions are marked as v1 for the current version and v2 for the future version. Specs may be found here.
  • The SAM Exclusions Search Web Services will not be updated to incorporate UEI or new EVS changes. Users of this web service should move to the beta.SAM Exclusions API in order to retrieve UEI and new EVS information concerning exclusions via interface.

The public will continue to receive UEI/EVS specifications as they are updated. IAE will release its testing plan by 30 December 2019. Additionally, IAE will complete the issuance of updated technical specifications interfacing systems. Contractors should start developing plans to allow for the interface changes and begin development for testing with IAE. (ibid)

Users with questions specific to interface testing should contact newsamtesting@gsa.gov. Users with questions specific to the SAM-generated UEI or entity validation services should contact entityvalidation@gsa.gov. (ibid)

Wanna Connect a Hybrid Cloud?

The Department of Defense (DoD) wants a hybrid cloud environment to serve as the cornerstone for department-wide use of artificial intelligence. The Joint Artificial Intelligence Center (JAIC) issued two sources sought notices from all business that can provide system engineering and integration “to support the procurement, implementation, and operation of a hybrid and multi-cloud deployable development and production platform for Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning (AI/ML) solutions.” (Fedscoop, November 25, 2019)

This hybrid cloud environment will form the basis of the Joint Common Foundation (JCF), a DoD/Government  AI/ML development platform, containing Data, Tools, and Processes. JCF will include shared data, reusable tools, frameworks, and standards. Additionally, it will include cloud and edge services to develop, secure, test and evaluate, deliver, and sustain capabilities. “The JCF will incorporate the architecture and software artifacts of the Enterprise Development, Security and Operations (DevSecOps) initiative and evolve toward enabling the DoD Artificial Intelligence Strategy.” (ibid)

Proposed vendors answer specific questions about past experience integrating multiple cloud providers at scale with continuous development and integration while meeting security compliance standards. A solicitation conference will be held in early 2020, followed by a request for quotation, and award by the end of September 2020.

The award of JCF will move swiftly. Give us a call if we can answer any questions or assist with your proposal efforts.