Motorcity

I am trying to get everyone's opinion on being embedded versus being centralized in a contracting setting. You see, I currently work in a centralized acquisitions office with about 150 contracting personnel. Our office is known to have customer service issues in several areas, including response time and communication. Often times, the "customers" and 1102s never actually meet. The work is simply done via email and over the phone with little human interaction. My agency has a few specialized 1102s embedded with various program offices, but overall, we do most of the acquisitions from one geographic location. The good thing is that I am surrounded by experienced contracting personnel with a wealth of knowledge. The bad part about being centralized is that customer service declines rapidly. I have noticed that many 1102s tend to lose focus of the requirement(s). However, newcomers and interns seem to benefit from being in a large acquisitions office rather than being in a field office with little support. What has your experience been being embedded/centralized? What did you enjoy about being embedded with a program? What did you enjoy about being in a central contracting office?

This is pretty much what the older employees were talking about with me. They complained that the 1102 field has become so automated that it may not really even require a college degree. I agree that we are now largely "buyers" for lack of a better term. Most of the younger and newer 1102s at my agency perform duties similar to the ones above. Seems like we use GWACs and existing IDIQs and other vehicles because everything is rushed. With that said, my agency has lost a massive amount of experienced folks in the last year due to retirements. Hundreds of years of combined experience walked right out the door and wasn't retained, unless you count the one retiree that came back as a part time contract adviser. In all, the one thing I did notice was the animosity between the older and younger 1102 employees when it came to the pay scale and promotions. The older employees complained that it took them decades to reach GS 14, when many of the younger 1102s were reaching 14 under the age of 30, yet they weren't working on anything different than the older and more experienced employees. Maybe that is just my agency though...

This morning I had an interesting discussion with eight veteran contracting officers (all near retirement age). We were all killing time around the table in a meeting room waiting for a presentation to start. I was the youngest of the group by 30 years and I am only about 4 years into the 1102 world (31 y.o). The casual topic of the "state" of contracting was up in the air and everyone shared their experiences in the field. So I asked the entire group if they would recommend entering into the 1102 field to anyone under 30 and I didn't get a single hand. Not a one. As a matter of fact, every person told me that they wouldn't even try to work for the government if they had to choose between public and private sectors. So would you go into the 1102 field if you had the chance to do it all over again? What do you tell younger co-workers regarding the field and its future?

One issue that I am seeing is the amount of wait-listing for required CON classes. Yes, some agencies have the resources to have their own internal CON training schools/facilities. However, my agency does not have that, so I am at the mercy of scheduling and open chairs in classes. I have been wait-listed for CON 353 for months now because of a backlog. My agency requires this course in order to meet certain "career milestones" including the required Level III certification. Speaking of Level III...my agency has far too many contracting employees with Level III training, yet these same employees do not do anything even remotely near even Level II work. Why would an agency push for advanced contract training for employees that do basic-level contracting work?

This is what is starting to happen to me in my current position at a civilian agency. For me, buying laptops, conference space and janitorial services is starting to become rather boring to say the least. Whenever I talk to DoD 1102s, they tell me about all the amazing projects they get to be a part of and how they play a major role in the contracting process. Seems like they are a long ways away from doing de-obs and task orders.

FPDS is the main system that my agency reports into after all contract actions. The good thing is that FPDS has the ability to pull information from our acquisition system (Momentum). The bad news is that it doesn't always pull data and we have to manually enter in everything, which takes a lot of time and effort. It seems like we are just duplicating information to be quite honest.

-The Smiths-Asleep (song) -Bombay Bicycle Club-A Different Kind of Fix (album) -Nick Drake-Cello Song -Duke Ellington-The Far East Suite (album)

Steve Kelman is great! He has visited my office a number of times and offered words of wisdom and gave his opinion on a number of issues. I think his visits were arranged through our internbal FedBid team...guess he sits on their Board.

Yes I am a gov. employee so was wondering if that would have any effect on it as well...

Yes, I have a good idea of the compensation in the industry today and have a few examples that I can use in order to compare or benchmark. I wasn't sure if it was actually legal for me to see the exact $ amount the contractor would be paid without the excess benefits and so forth. I figured that seeing the total rate would only be allowed.

As a rookie, I am in the process of breaking down and examining a base plus 4 service proposal and have wanted to know more about the proposed hourly rates. As a Contract Specialist, am I allowed to have the vendor breakdown the hourly rate and show me how much will go towards pay, benefits, profit, etc? Is this something I can legally ask and would they even have to respond? They basically gave a rate of $119.53 for the first year, but didn?t specifically breakdown that amount. Should I inquire deeper? Any thoughts?

Vern, thanks for the detailed and helpful reply and nope, I won?t sign the contract. It can be said that my current group is a bit disorganized and that is throwing me off since I am new to the world of contracting. The biggest issue I have is that I have 4 different ?parties? telling me to do 4 different things. It is strange because one my of COs is telling me to do things that aren?t even in the FAR while his boss is just worried about supporting the customer. The last thing I want to do is make ?enemies? in the office and agency, but beyond that, I am going to follow the FAR even if it peeves off someone.

As a new 1102, I have encountered a lot of problems that many on this forum would consider routine and easy to manage. As a newcomer, I tend to be pushed around by program offices and others groups because they know that I am ?green? and inexperienced. I have to admit, I am a bit afraid of stepping on anyone?s toes by being too assertive. So here is my issue? Basically, I am working on this IDIQ renewal for IT services?.it is for one individual who has been doing the same job for 11 year while working for different body shops. It is a base plus 4 years and under $2 million so it isn?t what I would call a crucial project. My research indicates that MANY people can do what this particular person does. So not long ago I get an email from the contract employee?s agency boss explaining that they want to keep this employee no matter what happens. The catch is that the ?employee? doesn?t want to leave his body shop because he is afraid he will lose money and benefits by going to anther company. What options do I have? We toyed with the idea of bringing this person on as a Fed but that seems like a far-fetched idea and not really in my realm of responsibility. I also looked at sole-sourcing to an 8(a) and having him be brought on board that vendor, but then again, he refuses to leave the company he is with. When I was hired I was told to never work against the wishes of my customers. This person has been on the job over a decade so he must be doing something right. But, isn?t that a bit of a stretched timeframe for a contractor doing the same job for the same agency? How valuable can this person really be if many others can do his job?

I am curious to know if other Contract Specialists and Officers have ever had issues with their Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization. The reason I ask is because my agency?s SDBU seems to be overreacting about every single contract action in the book. It seems like my hands are tied behind my back whenever I do anything?from using FedBid to Sole-sourcing 8(a) firms. Nothing is ever ?good enough? for them. Apparently, my home agency was ?reprimanded? for failing to meet certain Small Business goals several years back. Now, I understand the importance and role that small businesses play in the economy, but it seems to go overboard with so many things. In many cases, SDBU really hampers our effectiveness by holding things up for days and even weeks at a time. They always need time to review?and then review a little more. I don't mean to sound whiny but this office seems to hinder rather than help at times. I mean, they are great folks but it seems they would rather meet their SB goals at all costs. Has anyone had similar experiences with their Small Biz office?

As an intern, I am very interested and open to the testing methods prescribed by Mr. Edwards. The current ?status quo? involves assembly-line style training, which appears to be focused on presentation and speed rather than substance. One can only refer to the sheer amount of badly planned online training as an example of what is wrong with government acquisition training today. As you all know, DAU offers most basic CON courses such as 110, 111, and 112 online. From the onset, this would make sense to a time-conscious manager. These exams have no required essays and no presentations whatsoever. As a matter of fact, a student may finish the course without taking much away due to being allowed to ?fail? the exam 3 times before failing the class. By the way, the online exams are all untimed, open-book and seem to be focused on rote-learning methods rather than critical thinking. I will dare to go one further than Mr. Edwards and offer some sort of teamwork section of an exam where you are assigned a certain task to perform with other students. Maybe this could even be combined with an oral/presentation section of the examination? Maybe I am being a bit naive, but teamwork seems to be almost as important as self-reliance in the world of government contracts. I am sure the veterans of contracting will rip the prevois statement apart though. A lot of people seem to think that having an exam at the end of every class substitutes the need for having one final ?bar? examination. I can?t say that I have benefited from multiple choice exams at the end of a long class. From my experience, most people tend to take away more from a course that pushes critical thinking skills rather than memorization. Lectures with no form or clarity go in one ear and out the other when hands-on learning isn't invloved. That is why I have to read and explore on my own since I can't really trust the instructor to give me everything I need. Mr. Edwards also mentioned about how lawyers are not required to take the bar exam after one has passed. That is true, but COs are required to complete X amount of continuous learning credit hours every so many years. I have taken one of these elective courses filled with experienced COs just looking for a blow-off class just to use as filler. These ?continuous education? modules serve as nothing more than a means for external vendors to line their pockets. Most of them are 2-3 days long and offer no examination at the end.

The Siege of Vienna: The Last Great Trial Between Cross & Crescent by John Stoye. If you enjoy history you will love this one...

With all due respect Mr. Edwards, if that is the case, why hasn't there been more of an effort to revamp the acquisition training format? It seems to me that some people have a lack of faith in the training set-up and delivery. If this is true, why hasn?t there been a louder outcry from acquisition professionals in the field? I am aware of the two bills introduced my Senator McCaskill that may or may not help reform the acquisition environment. I am not sure how far these efforts would go towards reforming teaching and instruction methods. Mr. Edwards, how would you reform the training methods currently being used for acquisition interns?

I am in the Career Entry Program at the Dept. of State and can provide some insight to the program. The way I understand it is that each agency tailors their intern program to fit its mission and goals. The program basics, such as timeframe and training, remain the same. Going in, I was under the impression that the program was going to be very defined and rigid with specific routines and rules. Nothing could be further from the truth. Most interns don?t get anywhere near FAC-C Level II certification after their 2 years are up. Sadly, the HR folks and program coordinators simply do not understand the basic process of acquisition FAC-C certifications. Luckily, we have people in my department who help guide the interns and mentor them. I can?t say it is like that in every agency. Basically, you go in as a GS-7 and then ?promoted? to a 9 after a year considering that all training requirements are satisfied. You are then bumped up to an 11 after your 2 years in the program, but I am not sure if that happens to those who don?t complete all training requirements. I haven?t witnessed any sort of animosity or jealousy directed towards us interns from other co-workers. However, I have been talked down to by some members of the Foreign Service who apparently think they are exceptional and special. Mr. Edwards is correct in his assessment of the acquisition training quality and delivery. It really is hit or miss and this can have a negative impact on the development of interns. The online training is bland, boring and ineffective in developing the workforce. The classroom training is a gamble at best since there isn?t one set of training standards, or so it seems. The two main vendors that provide training are ESI and Management Concepts so there sin't much choice really. The best part of in-class training is the discussion (and dialogue) between students. As a matter of fact, I have learned almost as much from my fellow students as I have from the instructors. Sadly, some instructors strictly rely on rote learning and memorization rather than critical thinking and hands-on projects I was a bit relieved the read the following: Sec. 8. Prior Executive Orders. (a) Effective March 1, 2011, Executive Order 13162 (Federal Career Intern Program) is superseded and revoked. Any individuals serving in appointments under that order on March 1, 2011, shall be converted to the competitive service, effective on that date, with no loss of pay or benefits. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office...ecent-graduates