The House passed the IMPROVE Acquisition Act yesterday — to borrow a phrase — to improve DoD acquisition. Or at least that’s how the Hill sees it. And, for the most part, PSC agrees that the bill will make some needed improvements to the Defense Department’s acquisition processes. However, PSC has some serious reservations about amendments offered on the floor that take the bill off its intended track.
An amendment submitted by Rep. Alan Grayson, D-Fla., could require contracting officers to make cost at least half of the evaluation criteria on a contract unless a contracting officer justifies why cost shouldn’t be the primary consideration. How do you put cost above outcome on a research and development contract for new body armor or a new mine-resistant vehicle? Given the tremendous workloads staff-strapped contracting shops face, that’s what Grayson is doing since it is doubtful contracting officers have the time to provide written justifications on why best value should trump cost in such cases.
Rep. Phil Hare, D-Ill., offered another troubling amendment. Hare’s amendment would make it the “sense of Congress” that the government shouldn’t do business with any company that has violated a labor law. Excluding from further contracts any contractor that has a labor law violation against it doesn’t make “sense” to PSC. An acknowledged violation could be a signal that the company took responsibility for its action, proving it trustworthy. Further, a violation may be technical and that does not affect a contractors’ ability to fulfill its responsibilities to the government.
An amendment submitted by Rep. Alan Grayson, D-Fla., could require contracting officers to make cost at least half of the evaluation criteria on a contract unless a contracting officer justifies why cost shouldn’t be the primary consideration. How do you put cost above outcome on a research and development contract for new body armor or a new mine-resistant vehicle? Given the tremendous workloads staff-strapped contracting shops face, that’s what Grayson is doing since it is doubtful contracting officers have the time to provide written justifications on why best value should trump cost in such cases.
Rep. Phil Hare, D-Ill., offered another troubling amendment. Hare’s amendment would make it the “sense of Congress” that the government shouldn’t do business with any company that has violated a labor law. Excluding from further contracts any contractor that has a labor law violation against it doesn’t make “sense” to PSC. An acknowledged violation could be a signal that the company took responsibility for its action, proving it trustworthy. Further, a violation may be technical and that does not affect a contractors’ ability to fulfill its responsibilities to the government.
