New GAO Report on Federal Acquisition Challenges
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) issued another report of interest to the life cycle logistics and product support community earlier this week entitled “GAO-18-627 Federal Acquisitions: Congress and the Executive Branch Have Taken Steps to Address Key Issues, but Challenges Endure”.
In it, they highlighted a series of issues, including defense acquisition workforce challenges, saying “….the federal acquisition workforce faces workload and training challenges. GAO’s work has shown that DOD has enhanced its workforce, but some workforce gaps endure at DOD and across agencies” and highlighted “…a significant mismatch between the demands placed on the acquisition workforce and the personnel and skills available to meet those demands. In 2006, we testified that DOD’s acquisition workforce, the largest component of the government’s acquisition workforce, remained relatively unchanged while the amount and complexity of contract activity had increased.”
Among a number of other areas of interest is discussion on performance-based acquisition (PBA), which is “as the Panel reported in 2007, a preferred commercial technique. PBA focuses on contractors’ deliverables rather than how they perform the work. Rather than using traditional statements of work that define requirements in great detail, PBA uses performance work statements (PWS) that define requirements more generally based on desired outcomes. We have reported that defining requirements this way has been a struggle for DOD for several years. Additionally, we have found that implementing PBA can be particularly challenging when acquiring certain services.46 Services differ from products in several aspects and can offer challenges when attempting to define requirements and establish measurable, performance-based outcomes.”
The GAO goes on to say “during the course of this review, we identified that some cultural resistance to PBA has endured. Under PBA, which is structured around the results to be achieved as opposed to the manner in which the work is to be performed, a PWS may be prepared by a contractor in response to an agency’s statement of objectives. A PWS is a type of statement of work that describes the required results in clear, specific and objective terms with measurable outcomes.48 While some DOD and GSA officials reported that PBA has become an increasingly standard approach, other DOD officials told us that some acquisition officials are still reluctant to give contractors control over how agencies’ requirements will be met under PBA because they fear that they may not get what they need. The officials we spoke with asserted it is difficult to overcome decades of conducting federal acquisition using government-drafted statements of work that outline—often in precise detail—how an agency expects a contractor to perform work.”
In it, they highlighted a series of issues, including defense acquisition workforce challenges, saying “….the federal acquisition workforce faces workload and training challenges. GAO’s work has shown that DOD has enhanced its workforce, but some workforce gaps endure at DOD and across agencies” and highlighted “…a significant mismatch between the demands placed on the acquisition workforce and the personnel and skills available to meet those demands. In 2006, we testified that DOD’s acquisition workforce, the largest component of the government’s acquisition workforce, remained relatively unchanged while the amount and complexity of contract activity had increased.”
Among a number of other areas of interest is discussion on performance-based acquisition (PBA), which is “as the Panel reported in 2007, a preferred commercial technique. PBA focuses on contractors’ deliverables rather than how they perform the work. Rather than using traditional statements of work that define requirements in great detail, PBA uses performance work statements (PWS) that define requirements more generally based on desired outcomes. We have reported that defining requirements this way has been a struggle for DOD for several years. Additionally, we have found that implementing PBA can be particularly challenging when acquiring certain services.46 Services differ from products in several aspects and can offer challenges when attempting to define requirements and establish measurable, performance-based outcomes.”
The GAO goes on to say “during the course of this review, we identified that some cultural resistance to PBA has endured. Under PBA, which is structured around the results to be achieved as opposed to the manner in which the work is to be performed, a PWS may be prepared by a contractor in response to an agency’s statement of objectives. A PWS is a type of statement of work that describes the required results in clear, specific and objective terms with measurable outcomes.48 While some DOD and GSA officials reported that PBA has become an increasingly standard approach, other DOD officials told us that some acquisition officials are still reluctant to give contractors control over how agencies’ requirements will be met under PBA because they fear that they may not get what they need. The officials we spoke with asserted it is difficult to overcome decades of conducting federal acquisition using government-drafted statements of work that outline—often in precise detail—how an agency expects a contractor to perform work.”