GSA expands on O'Hare's GWACs comments

Ed O'Hare, assistant commissioner of the Office of Integrated Technology Services at GSA's Federal Acquisition Service, was quoted on June 24 saying that the agency would manage far fewer governmentwide acquisition contracts, or GWACs. Except for Alliant, Alliant SB, and a few GWACS geared to disadvantaged groups,  he said, “we’re going to let them all just expire naturally.”  

After his comments were reported on FCW.com and its sister site, WashingtonTechnology.com, GSA officials complained that the story was inaccurate and many visitors to the sites posted comments.

Federal Computer Week's acquisition editor, Matthew Weigelt, subsequently asked O'Hare to clarify and expand upon his comments, made during a panel discussion at the Washington Technology Top 100 Conference.

We sent the questions below to O'Hare, but a GSA public affairs official Robert Lesino said O'Hare was not available for an interview. Lesino sent these replies without specifying if they are O'Hare's actual words.
.

FCW:  During the panel discussion, you said GSA would let GWACs expire, except for Alliant and Alliant SB and other socio-economic GWACs. What is your thinking behind the statement?

GSA:  Alliant, as our next-generation enterprise GWAC, can provide what is currently provided by Millennia, Millennia Lite and ANSWER, [GSA's other key GWAC], in terms of contract scope, and it has been our strategy to replace these contracts with Alliant. ANSWER, Millennia and Millennia Lite can accept task orders up to their individual expiration dates and the awarded tasks can be for as long as five years. So these contract vehicles will continue to be administered by GSA for some time.

I was also answering the panel question, "What is a possible future federal marketplace?" For cost considerations, having a different approach that may in the future look like a hybrid of GWAC and schedules is a possibility.  Many factors would need to be addressed to move in this direction, including legislative, regulatory and contractual issues, putting any potential of this happening far into the future. The reorganization of FSS and FTS into FAS and the award of new ITS contracts created the need for a more internal focus over the past couple of years. We've successfully completed the reorganization process, and our new contract awards, and are now re-energized and focused on making our new and existing contract vehicles even more successful.

FCW: GSA actively took over or tried to take over other agencies’ GWACs, such as Commerce’s COMMITS and NASA’s SEWP, several years ago. What does the paring down of GWACs to just a few say about changes in GSA’s view of the contracting market?

GSA: On the panel, I talked about the benefits of Alliant and Alliant SB. We think that the current GWACs portfolio provides our customers with what is needed to meet their requirements and therefore see no need to extend or replace Millennia, Millennia Lite and ANSWER at this time. We support our GWACs portfolio and will consider the possible addition of other GWACs in the future to continue to meet the needs of our customer agencies.  

FCW: What does the future for contracting look like with a minimal number of GWACs?

GSA: We don't think about GWACs in terms of "how many" but instead on how well do they meet our customer agency needs. Inefficiencies and redundancies benefit no one, and part of my job is to look at where we can gain efficiencies.

About the Author

Matthew Weigelt is a freelance journalist who writes about acquisition and procurement.

The Fed 100

Save the date for 28th annual Federal 100 Awards Gala.

Featured

  • computer network

    How Einstein changes the way government does business

    The Department of Commerce is revising its confidentiality agreement for statistical data survey respondents to reflect the fact that the Department of Homeland Security could see some of that data if it is captured by the Einstein system.

  • Defense Secretary Jim Mattis. Army photo by Monica King. Jan. 26, 2017.

    Mattis mulls consolidation in IT, cyber

    In a Feb. 17 memo, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis told senior leadership to establish teams to look for duplication across the armed services in business operations, including in IT and cybersecurity.

  • Image from Shutterstock.com

    DHS vague on rules for election aid, say states

    State election officials had more questions than answers after a Department of Homeland Security presentation on the designation of election systems as critical U.S. infrastructure.

  • Org Chart Stock Art - Shutterstock

    How the hiring freeze targets millennials

    The government desperately needs younger talent to replace an aging workforce, and experts say that a freeze on hiring doesn't help.

  • Shutterstock image: healthcare digital interface.

    VA moves ahead with homegrown scheduling IT

    The Department of Veterans Affairs will test an internally developed scheduling module at primary care sites nationwide to see if it's ready to service the entire agency.

  • Shutterstock images (honglouwawa & 0beron): Bitcoin image overlay replaced with a dollar sign on a hardware circuit.

    MGT Act poised for a comeback

    After missing in the last Congress, drafters of a bill to encourage cloud adoption are looking for a new plan.

Reader comments

Wed, Jul 8, 2009 KJ Silver Spring

There is so much bad information on GWACs out there, and it's not just reporters who ought to know before they write. The ignorance pervades industry and even Contract Officers in government. A few simple facts: 1) There are not "hundreds of GWACs." There are fewer than fifteen. Most will naturally expire soon and that is OK! Alliant and Alliant SB cover the IT services scope comprehensively and they have ten years left! 2) For a government CO to run Alliant or Alliant SB acquisitions requires only a delegation of procurement authority. GSA needs no further involvement. 3) These GWACs are for every agency. The agencies do not need to create and operate their own. An alert OMB would have stopped that proliferation early. 4) The recent proliferation of IDIQs serves some bureaucratic ambitions, but it certainly does not serve the taxpayer as it plainly runs up costs. Accompanying policies also force government PMs into monopoly situations. This also runs up costs. It disappoints to see that GSA has not the leadership to make its own easy and strong case for their GWACs. So who is served by the trashing of GSA GWACs and the proliferation of IDIQs? And why does 1005 seem to want to repeat their inaccurate and incoherent messages?

Please post your comments here. Comments are moderated, so they may not appear immediately after submitting. We will not post comments that we consider abusive or off-topic.

Please type the letters/numbers you see above

More from 1105 Public Sector Media Group