Licenses on NASA SEWP

[KMKC]

I currently procure licenses for the enterprise on SEWP. It never fails that after we issue an order, someone will come out of the woodwork and indicate we forgot about them. Does anyone have an easy solution to this ongoing problem? I’d like to fix it going forward and use a vehicle that we can add to when needed, without issuing multiple DO’s for the same requirement. My department is stuck on GSA and SEWP but I’m really open to anything.  Thanks in advance.

[General.Zhukov]

Most (maybe all?) federal agencies have a legislative mandate to get a handle on their software acquisition.  The MEGABYTE Act in particular requires agencies to implement a software management process that is under the CIO (not Contracting).  What you are describing is a failure of software management.  This is IT's problem, and they should fix it.

Limited to contracting:

1) https://www.sewp.nasa.gov/catalogs.shtml - sorta like a BPA, but better.  

2) If you must by software through  highly-specified GSA/SEWP orders, write-in as much flexibility as possible.  For example, Option for Additional Quantity, P-Card payment authorized, etc.

3) A good source of info and best practices for enterprise software procurement - https://www.esi.mil/Resources.aspx

4) Whenever possible, I try to consolidate a particular software license into a single order and co-term the license PoP.  Use modifications to add more software.  Makes administration a lot easier.

 

[apsofacto]

Just to clarify, is the "someone" a vendor saying they wanted to submit a quote and feels frozen out of the competition, or is it a person at your agency who never got their license?

[KMKC]

Someone at the agency...the Program office contacts all of the components and gathers up all of the requirements and somehow one or two always seem to fall through the cracks. I work out of HQ and we have components that operate under us that we buy for...we end up having multiple DO’s for the same requirement. Trying to be more efficient. 

[General.Zhukov]

16 minutes ago, KMKC said:

multiple DO’s

Not if you are exercising options for additional quantity instead of issuing multiple DO's.  

[KMKC]

What do you mean?

[General.Zhukov]

Example

June - Issue order #1 for 1,000 term software licenses from SEWP.  Period of Performance of one year ending July 31, 2020.  Licenses $1/Month  so $12,000 FFP.

Order has clause 52.217-6/7 for, say, up to 500 additional licenses.  All additional licenses co-term on July 31, 2020 and licenses cost is pro-rated per month.

July - Hey, we forgot about the American Samoa field office, we need another 50 licenses starting August 1st.

Issue modification to order #1, adding 50 licenses for $550.  (50 licenses x $1/month x 11 months)

Now you have only one order, #1, even though you've purchased the licenses two times.

June of Next Year - Issue order #2 for 1,050 term licenses from SEWP.

 

There are better ways to buy software, but if your agency is like mine and tries to use notionally competitive FFP GWAC orders for all IT, then I've found this method to be beneficial.

1) Easier and faster to do an option than a new order. 

2) Easier to track and administrate if all the software is on one contract vehicle.

 

 

 

[KMKC]

21 minutes ago, General.Zhukov said:

Example

June - Issue order #1 for 1,000 term software licenses from SEWP.  Period of Performance of one year ending July 31, 2020.  Licenses $1/Month  so $12,000 FFP.

Order has clause 52.217-6/7 for, say, up to 500 additional licenses.  All additional licenses co-term on July 31, 2020 and licenses cost is pro-rated per month.

July - Hey, we forgot about the American Samoa field office, we need another 50 licenses starting August 1st.

Issue modification to order #1, adding 50 licenses for $550.  (50 licenses x $1/month x 11 months)

Now you have only one order, #1, even though you've purchased the licenses two times.

June of Next Year - Issue order #2 for 1,050 term licenses from SEWP.

 

There are better ways to buy software, but if your agency is like mine and tries to use notionally competitive FFP GWAC orders for all IT, then I've found this method to be beneficial.

1) Easier and faster to do an option than a new order. 

2) Easier to track and administrate if all the software is on one contract vehicle.

 

 

 

 

[KMKC]

1) Easier and faster to do an option than a new order. 

This is perfect! I think this will work and I’ll take a look at your other suggestions as well. Thanks so much. 

[apsofacto]

19 hours ago, KMKC said:

the Program office contacts all of the components and gathers up all of the requirements and somehow one or two always seem to fall through the cracks.

Yes, that is a goof in the IT group, software management failure as General describes.  Thanks for confirming.

[formerfed]

Another thing to consider is establishing an enterprise wide site license.  You estimate the number of users and negotiate an enterprise agreement.  Then you don’t have to deal with your issue and the software supplier saves time and effort too.