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

Tag: General Services Administration

Federal Supply Schedules: VA=GSA????

Earlier this year the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released the report, “VA Acquisition Management: Steps Needed to Ensure Healthcare Federal Supply Schedules Remain Useful (GAO-20-132).” (Federal News Network, February 21, 2020)

The report dives into the non-pharmaceutical Federal Supply Schedules and lays out 11 recommendations, nine to the Department of Veterans Affairs and two to the General Services Administration (GSA). The report also outlines how the VA and GSA should address their contracting operations supporting veterans healthcare. (ibid)

For some background, the Veterans Administration manages nine healthcare-related Federal Supply Schedules (VA FSS) that provide medical devices as well as services. Included in the VA FSS are medical-surgical equipment, pharmaceuticals, patient mobility devices, laboratory testing, and analysis services. The VA FSS accounts for about $15.4 billion in annual purchases, the pharmaceutical schedule making up $12.6 billion, with the additional eight schedules coming in at about $2.8 billion. For the last four years, sales under the eight non-pharmaceutical schedules have been somewhat flat. (ibid)

It turns out that the VA and GSA have a few areas where they are lacking a “team” mentality. The GAO also finds there is limited guidance and training of the VA contracting staff and it seems the VA FSS and the VA’s Medical-Surgical Prime Vendor program are duplicating efforts. This means longer processing times for contract awards, contract mods and higher admin costs for the VA and industry as a whole. (ibid)

GAO recommends the following:

  1. The VA provide comprehensive FSS guidance and training to the FSS contracting staff
  2. The VA and GSA improve collaboration, including the potential use of GSA’s procurement tools to support the VA FSS
  3. The VA evaluate timeliness goals and barriers to achieving them in the contracting process
  4. The VA assess FSS and MSPV-NB duplication to resource utilization and leverage its buying power (ibid)

The Coalition’s “VA Multiple Award Schedule White Paper” gives recommendations to increase the effectiveness and efficiency of the VA FSS. The recommendations are:

  • Recognize commercial practices when possible
  • Consistency with GSA/FSS policy
  • Streamline the evaluation processes
  • Reduce contracting costs for the government as well as industry (ibid)

The white paper goes on to make specific recommendations to align the VA’s price negotiations strategy with GSA’s approach. Additionally, the white paper touches on the use of GSA’s e-Offer and e0Mod systems to streamline the procurement process. As it turns out, the VA and GSA have very different approaches to contract audit support for their FSS programs. The white paper recommends the two align with GSA’s approach. (ibid)

Will there be more opportunities to work with the VA once their processes are synced up to GSAs? Give us a call.

beta.sam.gov Hiccup Hiccup

When FedBizOpps (FBO) migrated to beta.sam.gov, everyone expected a few hiccups. Now three months in, it’s fair to say government contractors have been experiencing more than just a few hiccups. GSA says the number of help desk calls they get is no more than they got with FBO. However, the frustration over beta.sam.gov runs deep.

Last week contractor discouragement came to a head when the Professional Services Council sent GSA a letter airing not only their complaints but also their concerns. The 22-page letter outlined the four areas of greatest concern:

  • Access Challenges;
  • Search Parameters;
  • Capability to receive contract information;
  • Difficulties in how the site displays information. (Federal News Network, February 17, 2020)

At EZGSA, we have found problems with data organization, standardization, and even saving information. GSA seems ready to add new capabilities next month, but should they? Many feel the backend structure should be fixed before the next phase, moving the Federal Procurement Data System-Next Generation (FPDS-NG) reporting capabilities to beta.sam.gov in March. (ibid)

Large companies are better able to handle the costs associated with down time or lost data. Small businesses that must  spend thousands of dollars on software, just to get what they got before the FBO migration, are at a great disadvantage.

Need help navigating beta.sam.gov? We will do our best to help and take away some of the frustration. Give us a call.

Federal Supply Class Review

What happens when the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) and the General Services Administrations (GSA) get together to increase efficiencies and effectiveness of the national supply chain? You get the first Federal Supply Class (FSC) review in almost 50 years. (Defense Logistics Agency, October 9, 2019)

So why now, you ask? According to Alan Thomas, commissioner of GSA’s Federal Acquisition Service, it is to “optimize the movement of supplies to our nation’s troops and reduce duplication in the federal supply chain.”

FSC’s review involves all 600 FSCs, or about seven million items used by federal and military consumers and categorizes them by similarity. This review will reduce redundancies and improve purchasing efficiencies as well as customer readiness and responsiveness. Checks and balances will keep both organizations compliant with principles of their original agreement. (ibid)

The 1971 Supply Management Relationship Agreement between DLA and GSA gave DLA authority over supplies within assigned FSCs used by the military regardless of their use by civil agencies. GSA manages items used by federal agencies that are commercially available. Today GSA and DLA  maintain contracts with vendors delivering directly to customers. DLA forecasts demand and then supply chain representatives, vendors and DLA Distribution ensure on-time delivery worldwide.

DLA and GSA are working side by side to put together an automated tool that categorizes FSCs for analysis. The tool will produce summary-level data on all items to ultimately determine if a change in acquisition strategy might lead to improved efficiencies and effectiveness for the government, taxpayers, and customers. Both DLA and GSA must be in agreement to transfer logistics management of any items.

“Regardless of item transfer decisions, the process and tools we’ve developed in conducting this review provide an archive of information that supports FSC management determinations beyond the simple criteria identified in the 1971 agreement,” Jay Schaeufele, GSA account manager for DLA Logistics Operation’s Whole of Government Division, said. “This information is important as we navigate government and acquisition reform initiatives and evaluate potential economic efficiencies without losing vision of DLA’a first priority to warfighter readiness.“ (ibid)

Jeff Thurston, director of GSA’s Office of Supply Chain Management, said: “GSA’s new business model challenges us to identify new ways to serve environments where stocking product was previously the go-to solution.” (ibid)

The Commercial Platforms Program will update how commercial products are bought by federal agencies via partnerships with commercial e-platform providers. Government agencies will access commercial platforms as part of a whole-of-government approach. This approach will give agencies visibility into online spending, thus reducing supply-chain risk while providing more time for focusing on mission-oriented acquisition.

According to Laura Stanton, deputy assistant commissioner for Category Management in GSA’s Office of Information Technology Category, “this three-year proof of concept will offer federal buyers easy access to e-marketplace providers and commercial products. Additionally, agencies will have better visibility and insight on purchasing patterns to bring one-off spending under management. The Commercial Platform’s proof of concept offers a way for agencies to access commercial platforms as part of a whole-of-government approach, strengthening GSA’s commitment to maximize the government’s buying power through economies of scale.” (ibid)

GSA and DLA are consolidating purchasing, tracking, and spending analysis while taking advantage of government-wide and best-in-class acquisition vehicles. In addition, they are working together to communicate supply chain issues such as cybersecurity, fraud, and counterfeit parts while working with the military to determine optimal shipping routing.

Will this translate into possible changes to your current contract or bid? We’re available to discuss.

Strike Force vs. Collusion

The Justice Department has created a new interagency partnership to battle procurement and antitrust crimes, the Procurement Collusion Strike Force (PCSF). The PCSF is comprised of the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice, multiple U.S. Attorneys’ Offices around the country, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and the Inspectors General for multiple Federal agencies. (Justice.gov)

The PCSF will “deter, detect, investigate and prosecute antitrust crimes and related criminal schemes,” according to Assistant Attorney General Makan Delrahim. He feels many open investigations are related to procurement crimes. Last year alone, the federal government spent almost $500 billion on contracts for goods and services. The overcharge stemming from illegal actions can be significant not only to the government but to all taxpayers as well.  (Government Executive, November 5, 2019)

Bid-rigging is alive and real. According to the Justice Department, earlier this year five Korean oil companies were prosecuted for bid-rigging contracts to provide fuel to U.S. military bases. The PCSF uses data analytics to identify occurrences of procurement collusion. The website has a complaint form, training materials, and legal resources for anyone who believes they have witnessed suspicious activity. (ibid)

Questions about the new interagency partnership? Give us a call.