Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Clearly the senate read the Wifcon age survey and chart on the aging and shrinking 1102 workforce. This is their reply. Do you think it has a high likelihood of making it? How do you feel about the alternative educational pathways?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, bob7947 said:

Make sure you read Section 4.

With respect to Section 4, I doubt that much will come of it. It assigns various training responsibilities to OFPP, a moribund office that does not have a leader (just an acting) and isn't likely to have a long-term leader in the near future, if ever again.

As far as I can tell, "experiential learning" is just a fancy term for a kind of OJT.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, bob7947 said:

S. 4623:  AGILE Procurement Act of 2022.  Make sure you read Section 4.

Bob, do you have access to any background information concerning the origination or development of the language of the bill? Some aspects are interesting, in particular the inclusionary aspects and alternate learning qualifications. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Start with the low hanging fruit.  There is the Press Release that accompanies the bill.   Start with that.  He introduced S. 583 - PRICE Act of 2021 which became law and he mentioned in his press release.  Why?

There was a Business Meeting today in the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee that included discussions on this bill among others.  Start at about the 17 minute mark.  Maybe Peters will elaborate on it there.  I believe he might mention that there will be markups of the bills in September.  That may be followed by a Senate report when and if it gets out of committee.

I wouldn't go any further than the press release and the business meeting at this time--unless the press release mentions something specific.  The bill only has about 2 months in this Congreess for anything to happen.  Then it has to be introduced in the new 118th Congress beginning next year.

[At about the 35 minute mark Senator Lankford mentions a couple things in the bill.  Apparently, he and his staff worked on it too.]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the press release:

Quote

U.S. Senator Gary Peters (MI), Chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, introduced bipartisan legislation to modernize the way the federal government acquires technology. The legislation would boost innovation in the procurement process and increase opportunities for innovative small businesses that want to contract with the federal government. The bill would also help the federal government attract and retain qualified procurement professionals, and provide the tools and training they need to timely purchase new technologies.

Hogwash.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something though needs to happen.  Traditional ways of putting together contracts often don’t work with technology.  It’s amazing how many offices still say they need approval from their management to do other than fixed price awards even though all industry knows is pay for resources used.

Two things stand out to me

Quote

3) Spending on cybersecurity, software, cloud computing, and artificial intelligence technologies is projected to grow significantly.

(4) Rapid technological developments and increased Government demand create a need for a Federal acquisition workforce with an understanding of technology and related procurement considerations

I’ve watched for five years 1102’s struggling to put together a basic contract for cloud computing.  Despite the issues with commercial software licenses going back 30 years, a large share of 1102s have no idea what to do faced with a license agreement from a company as part of their offer.  I’m sure if most contract offices have a new program office request for artificial intelligence, they would be lost on how to proceed.  We need people to have a basic knowledge of what they are contracting for. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mastery of IT is essential to our nation's survival and prosperity.

That means that IT acquisition is essential to our nation's survival and prosperity.

It should be conducted by a streamlined bureaucracy pursuant to special and streamlined rules, not FAR.

It should be done by a special corps of expert acquisition personnel, who do no other kinds of buys—a kind of acquisition special forces.

They should have their own excepted service series and receive special education and training.

However, our clunky, incompetent government could never pull off such a thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, C Culham said:

Should DARPA figure in to any specialized corps?

I spent a couple years at DARPA.  While they have a someone unique purpose, the contracting for R&D isn’t different than what other agencies like Wright Patterson (forget their title), Naval Research Lab, Aberdeen, or HHS.  All those places have reasonably knowledgeable people in subject matter that can work with program offices to make awards. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...