Program managers that the GAO interviewed say contractor employees provide “technical” input into the decision-making process as opposed to direct involvement in the decisions themselves.  In fact, out of 21 DoD offices reviewed by the GAO, “at 15 of these offices, contractor employees outnumber DOD employees and the percentage of contractor employees in the remaining offices ranges from 19 to 46 percent.”

The GAO report on PCI says “Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) defines contractor participation in the evaluation of contract proposals as one of those functions that may approach being in the inherently governmental function category.”  The report also notes that “no department-wide or FAR policy obliges DOD offices using contractor employees to require that they be free from personal conflicts of interest.”

So the last report leading up to the GAO legal team’s recommendation on Federal Acquisition Regulation Case 2008-025, due out March 10^th, explicitly links a concept with no definition, “inherently governmental,” to personal conflicts of interest.

The question is: will new PCI regulations shut contractors out of the acquisition process by expanding the definition of “inherently governmental?”

From the perspective of some in Washington, that might not be a bad idea.  Congressman Jim Moran (D-VA) for one.  He told ExecutiveBiz last year, “We tipped that balance in the last few years by outsourcing inherently governmental work, in my opinion.  That’s why I support Secretary Gates’ effort to establish 20,000 more acquisition personnel as an example, 9,000 new positions and 11,000 converted from contracting positions.  The acquisition process is inherently governmental.  It should not have been contracted out, so we are going to bring it back in.”

His colleague Congressman Gerry Connolly (D-VA) from the neighboring 11th Congressional District in Virginia concurs.  He told ExecutiveBiz, “There are some functions, like acquisition, that are properly brought inside government.”  He went on, “Streamlining regulations is something Congress wants to do to level the playing field and rationalize the current process.”

Next week, PCI from the Contractors’ point of view.

Related posts:

1. Is PCI Fracturing Relationships Between Contractors and the Federal Government? While there has been a lot of recent buzz over...
2. House Passes Bill that Will Reduce Need of Contractors The House approved a spending bill on December 16th, 2009...
3. Is a Policy Shift Brewing on Fixed Price Contracts? At a Navy conference in Arlington last week, Secretary of...

Some experts say PCI will fracture relationships between government contractors, government, and employees on both sides.  Basically, if a contractor does a lot of work with the Navy, nothing stops him from taking a job at the Navy, but if a Navy employee does a lot of work with a particular contractor, it’s difficult for him to get a job there due to a possible personal conflict of interest.  Is this a double standard?

Using our previous example, if a contractor were to take a job at the Navy, it would be extremely difficult to award contracts to people he used to work with, or even let his former co-workers take him out to dinner.  Essentially, moving from industry to government requires an executive to severely cut back his ties to the world of industry, despite continuous calls from government for an increased “public/private partnership.”

Imagine if an unhappy, under-performing subordinate at a government contracting firm was up for a job at the Navy.  In that case, the government contractor’s boss wouldn’t be able to pick up a phone and ask the hiring officer not to hire him, even if he was unqualified for the job. This “impartiality” effectively hinders industry’s ability to foster an open dialogue with government and is detrimental to public/private cooperation. Also, if the subordinate should take the job at the Navy, he would be justified in steering contracts away from your firm, to appear impartial, an untenable position from a government contractor’s point of view.

This double standard lacks protection for government contractors and offers protection to government employees.  Government has corrective course of action in this example while government contracting is helpless.

The regulatory gap is about to close on March 10th when the GAO’s Legal team releases its implementation strategy of Federal Acquisition Regulation Case 2008-025, Preventing Personal Conflicts of Interest for Contractor Employees Performing Acquisition Functions.  Their recommendations will likely shape the interaction between government contractors and federal employees.

This is the first of a five-part series on personal conflicts of interest.  Please comment on this post or direct comments to ellen@executivegov.com.  The rest of the articles in the series will focus on the government, government contractors, government employees, and government contracting employees.

Next week: PCI and the Government

Related posts:

1. Personal Conflicts of Interest and “Inherently Governmental” Functions What does the PCI picture look like from the government’s...
2. Secretary of Navy Mabus to Shipbuilders: “Demand More Accountability” Federal contractors working with the Navy can expect to see...
3. House Passes Bill that Will Reduce Need of Contractors The House approved a spending bill on December 16th, 2009...

The Pentagon’s new Quadrennial Defense Rev­iew has found an increased threat from China in the realms of space and cyberspace, and the need for more choppers, predator drones and light armor on the ground in Afghanistan.

But can the Department of Defense handle two directions at the same time?

Rather than focus on fighting two traditional wars, as has been the case, the time has come for the nation’s warfighters to multi-task – to be ready for the unknown, because the threats faced by the country have never been more diverse.

While American relations with the Red Dragon chill seemingly by the hour, our need to beef up cyber security becomes increasingly necessary.

As The New New Internet’s Michael Cheek described last week:

“This absolute reliance on networks also serves as one of our nation’s greatest vulnerabilities. Previously, researchers demonstrated that a power generator could be destroyed by hacking the system and causing an overload.  With the majority of critical infrastructure held by the private sector, the US faces a series of unique challenges in defending domestic networks.”

Read the article here

But as the hi-tech threat from our debtors to the east mounts, the ongoing ground struggle against our foes in Afghanistan is persistent.  Since America has experienced success with surveillance and attack procedures performed by the unmanned predator drones, that will remain a pillar of the strategy.

The report calls for more drones and helicopters throughout the early years of the new decade, tools that have proven their worth in the mountains of Afghanistan.  Going with proven solutions is always a good start.

The report states: “It is no longer appropriate to speak of ‘major regional conflicts’ as the sole or even the primary template for sizing, shaping and evaluating U.S. forces. Rather, U.S. forces must be prepared to conduct a wide variety of missions under a range of different circumstances.”

Fulfilling the point is the key to the future success of the nation’s armed forces.  The time for full-scale attack patterns has ended – America must use superior technologies to her benefit, not waste them.  With the nation’s defense working to diversify tactics, she’s on the right track.

Related posts:

1. DNI Dennis Blair Gives Testimony Yesterday, the Director of National Intelligence, Dennis Blair, gave his...
2. Defense Secretary Gates Visits Soldiers in Afghanistan In a three-day trip to Afghanistan, Secretary of Defense Robert...
3. Joint Chiefs Chairman Admiral Mike Mullen: US Is Committed to South/Central Asia for the Long Term Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Navy Adm. Mike Mullen told...

1)     Casey Coleman, Chief Information Officer of the General Services Administration may just have the best blog in the federal government.  Engaging, topical, thoughtful and professional, she describes “Around the Corner: Innovation in the Business of Government – A GSA Blog” as “…a place where we could challenge assumptions, explore something new, and discover something unknown.”  Though she only updates a couple of times a month usually, it is tough to find a post that does not shed deep insight into the government.

2)     Department of the Navy Chief Information Officer Rob Carey was the first CIO to start a blog – a means of communicating directly with the people who need the open line most.  Carey blogged: “My intention with this blog is to open up a straightforward and public dialogue with DON personnel, and specifically the brave Sailors and Marines who are out on the front lines protecting this country, so that I can fully understand what their IT needs are. It is essential that they have what they need to do their jobs to the best of their abilities.”  The “public dialogue” part is the kind of stuff the Obama administration loves to hear.

3)     Federal Chief Information Officer Vivek Kundra’s blog on the usaspending.gov’s IT Dashboard updates periodically, delivering in-depth information about key government initiatives like Data.gov in a personal engaging tone.  Not many government executives are able to work in Beatles references so easily.

4)     The FDA Transparency Blog is not attached to a particular individual at the agency, but it serves as a good example of how to get important information from the official – in this case Afia Asamoah, transparency initiative coordinator, and Commissioner of Food and Drugs Margaret A. Hamburg, M.D., to the public in a single step.

5)     NASA Chief Information Officer Linda Cureton, maintains a blog that focuses on the art of the CIO, IT and other topics a high-ranking industry professional could provide valuable tips on.  The blog has an engaging and personal field and always provides an interesting read on a site with some stiff competition – try having your blog right next to an astronaut’s.

SO WHY DO THESE BLOGS WORK?

1)     Direct feedback from the public – On his blog, Carey always closes his posts by asking the readership for their feedback.  “What do you think?” and “Share your ideas for additional strategies” go a long way in engaging the public to think about what types of policymaking issues and decisions the office is faced with on a daily basis.  Granting the ability to comment on the blog posts also gives the impression that the official writing the blog – or at least someone close to them – values the public feedback and takes it into account when performing their job on a daily basis.

2)     No middle man required – Most of the time, to get an opinion from a high-ranking member of the government, one has to go an agency’s press office.  By the time the official’s message has reached the public it has changed hands numerous times – from the official to the press office to the press – it feels processed and worked over.  An agency’s message is like fresh fish; the quickest and most direct route to the consumer is best – and what route is more direct than from the desk of the official to the public via a blog?

3)     Official becomes the insider columnist – Just as the direct route is the best route, the direct source is the best source.  The ideas and opinions floated on federal officials’ blogs are a straight line to the most powerful minds in the government.  These bloggers are the deep background sources industry columnists crave.

4)     A living, breathing bio – With the high price placed on transparency, the blog is able to serve as something of an evolving bio.  The average citizen can glean more for a wealth of professional opinions than from three paragraphs worth of job titles and higher education degrees.

5)     Government officials are people, too – While some who keep tabs on tech trends in the government have been critical of some federal bloggers for straying off topic with more personal posts, this may not be a terrible idea.  It’s helpful to keep the public aware from time to time that the folks who call the shots in the government are like them in many respects.  Just keep the blog aimed at the issues relating to the agency.

6)     Engaging a new generation – The portion of the country that either blogs, is familiar with blogging, or knows how to find and read a blog has become the overwhelming majority over the past decade.  The medium is one that the general public is becoming increasingly comfortable with over time and will be a valuable asset to the government for years to come.  While engaging younger segments of the population is not and probably never will be an easy task for federal agencies, playing on their turf helps the process.

Related posts:

1. Launch of Open Government Directive: What This Means for Agencies On Tuesday morning, at 11:00 a.m. eastern time, Vivek Kundra,...
2. Tracking the Progress of Open Government In the most recent movement towards implementation of the Open...
3. Is PCI Fracturing Relationships Between Contractors and the Federal Government? While there has been a lot of recent buzz over...

While Secretary of Defense Robert Gates told top contracting executives last week that he wants “steady, consistent growth in defense budgets,” he gave no indication whether those increased contracting dollars would come in the form of fixed price or cost-plus contracts.

From recent comments, it seems like the DoD is moving at least a little bit toward fixed-price contracts.  Amid calls from Congress and the White House for more contractor accountability, this comes as no surprise.  Whether it is an effective measure of cost control is up for debate, however.

Jacques Gansler, the leader of an army report entitled ‘Urgent Reform Required,’ believes that circumstances have shifted towards a “Global War on Contractors.”  On the subject of fixed-price contracts, he says “I could go down a long list of programs where they tried to use fixed price on development programs. They show, overwhelmingly, that the cost tends to rise during that program. That’s because technology changes, threats change, requirements change, opportunities to get even better systems change. I don’t know of any programs in the history of defense that don’t have requirements changes after the initial bid.”

So, while the jury is still out on the effectiveness of fixed-price contracts at controlling costs, it seems like the government is going to move partially toward fixed-price contracts (take the recent RFP for the Air Force tanker, for example).

Related posts:

1. Secretary of Navy Mabus to Shipbuilders: “Demand More Accountability” Federal contractors working with the Navy can expect to see...
2. Is PCI Fracturing Relationships Between Contractors and the Federal Government? While there has been a lot of recent buzz over...
3. Federal Agencies Reach Half Way Point of Contracting Budget Reductions In a report released Monday, the Office of Management and...

The attempted Christmas attack brings up a slew of questions that demand immediate answers.

“The president is looking for answers on this,” Denis McDonough, chief of staff of the White House National Security Council, told reporters Monday in Hawaii. McDonough said officials have begun to assemble information related to watch list procedures. As yet, no one has been named to oversee the watch list review, he said.

There is one major road block for the appointment of a TSA administrator: the Senate. Each and every appointment coming from the executive office or any administrative office has to go through the Senate. Currently, the TSA appointment has been delayed until the return from recess.   After waiting eight months for the appointment from the White House, the Senate has yet to even set a date for the nomination hearing.

One Senator has even gone far enough to block further proceedings over a fear that the new selection would allow TSA workers to unionize. Former FBI agent and police detective Erroll Southers is the president’s pick for TSA chief. These appointments should be routine, yet are being delayed by politics.

TSA has been operating without a head for almost a full year. The result is an agency unable to muster the political pull to effectively change security standards. The revolving door standard of leadership has been dismissed in nearly every industry, why do we expect it to work in a government agency?

Others disagree with this assessment, suggesting that even if TSA had an activley appointed head the attempted attack on Christmas would still have happened.

Whether the attempted attack could have been prevented or not is no longer the issue at hand. The technology of TSA needs to take huge steps to catch up. The metal detector system used in airports dates back to the 1980’s.TSA receives copious amounts of data from and about passengers with no real way of categorizing or storing this data. Technology such as full body imaging scanners that looks beyond clothing would upgrade our current metal detectors. While overstepping privacy issues, these scanners would allow for complete security, even detecting underwear bombs. In reaction to the attempted attack, most airlines are restricting the last hour of flight time mandating passangers to be in their seats.

In addition to photo imaging sensors, a passenger database can be constructed to hold information about passengers. As citizens, we should begin to understand that while traveling privacy is second to security. We willingly give up information to Facebook and other social networking sites with less motivation and less consideration for safety.

The current  Acting Administrator Gale D. Rossides, a Bush appointee, has been holding the train to the tracks. She is competent and knows the system well but is unwilling to take any chances. Her unwillingness to risk combined with her lack of political ties to the current administration makes her a sitting duck.

So now, after the Senate has voted on history making health care legislation should they not enable other agencies to make necessary changes as well?

Related posts:

1. Obama to Release Preliminary Report on Christmas Day Attack Last night in an address to the Nation, President Obama...
2. Postal Service Given Responsiblity to Deliver Antidote in Case of Bio Attack On December 30, President Obama signed Executive Order 13528, “Establishing...
3. Harding, Retired Army General, to Lead TSA President Obama will today tap Robert Harding, the retired...

As the US ramps up its efforts in Afghanistan, with the recently announced surge of 30,000 additional combat troops, it is essential that cooperation be enhanced between US forces and Pakistani allies, fighting the insurgency on each side of the border.

Pakistan is currently at the forefront of the fight against terrorism. The border between Afghanistan and Pakistan is approximately 1500 miles and Taliban units train and hide in the border regions between the two nations. The Pakistani military and government have rejected allowing US troops to enter Pakistan to fight the insurgency there. That leaves the Pakistani military and intelligence services with the responsibility on their side of the border. The military has launched relatively successful campaigns in Swat and South Waziristan earlier this year.

In order to greater facilitate battling the insurgency, cooperation, particularly in intelligence, must increase between the two countries. However, there are a number of obstacles to greater cooperation.

During the Cold War, Pakistan and the US maintained relatively close military ties. Military officers from Pakistan would go to the US for education and training opportunities. For example, the current chief of staff for the Pakistani Army, General Asfaq Kayani, attended a training course at Fort Bragg, GA. The older Pakistani officers who have had the benefit of such training and education tend to have better relations with their current US counterparts.

However, the fall of the Berlin Wall began to alter the relationship between the two countries. After Pakistan acquired nuclear weapons, the US government severed military ties with Pakistan in retaliation. From 1990-2002, as a result of the Pressler Amendment, the US had no military ties to Pakistan. Thus, Pakistani officers went for education and training to the Middle East and China.

There are also some cultural issues with increased cooperation. Pakistanis are generally suspicious of the United States, particularly the military and intelligence services. Pakistanis tend to be suspicious of potential US interference in domestic affairs, as was highlighted by the outcry to the recent aid package approved by Congress. Recent polls conducted in Pakistan also suggest that a significant portion of the population still believe that 9/11 was a conspiracy instigated by the US government. The US currently does not seek to engage the conspiracy theories propagated throughout the Pakistani media (instead treating them the way conspiracy theories are treated in this country). However, the ambassador of Pakistan, Husain Haqqani, believes that the US must engage the conspiracy theories if they are to improve relations and perceptions within Pakistan.

On the US side, older intelligence professionals are deeply suspicious of Pakistani intelligence as well. However, some of the distrust seems to be eroding as the US military watches successful Pakistani military and intelligence operations. Also, the building of personal relationships, particularly through a military officer exchange program, is also helping to overturn some previously held prejudices.

The US and Pakistan currently have an exchange program that is set to double in the next year. However, more needs to be done and at a faster rate to significantly improve the cooperation and trust between both sides. This could be best accomplished by US personnel working towards growing real relationships with counterparts in Pakistan. With the advent of modern technology, the slow bureaucratic practices of using the exchange program can be overcome. Pakistani officers do not need to head the US and US personnel do not have to enter Pakistan. It is necessary to, at the very least, build some nascent relationships that can be built upon in the future. But leveraging social media platforms and other modern communications methods would be a good place to start.

If the US fails to quickly build its partnership base, we will lose the ability to successful contain and defeat the insurgency in Afghanistan. While more US troops can certainly cut down on the number of insurgent fighters, we need cross border cooperation to ensure that insurgents have no place safe to run to. That will leave them with two options: surrender or die.

Related posts:

1. George Bressler George Bressler currently serves as supervisory border patrol agent of...
2. Lynn Boosts Cybersecurity Ties Down Under Deputy Defense Secretary William Lynn visited with American allies in...
3. Lt. Gen. Keith Alexander Keith B. Alexander is the Lieutenant General of the U.S...