the lectern banner

By Steve Kelman

Blog archive

18F lends the contracting community a hand

team of attentive businesspeople

For the past nine months, government contracting officials have had an online tool that gives them quick access to fully burdened hourly rates for 48,000 labor categories from about 3,000 General Services Administration governmentwide professional services contracts. The hourly rates can also be filtered by subcategories such as education level and years of experience, and the app generates a bar graph showing the distribution of labor rates on different contracts for a given labor category.

The tool, called Contract Awarded Labor Category, is the result of an effort by civil servants at GSA's Region 10 in Seattle, which manages professional services contracts in areas such as environmental services, advertising and translation services. Since launching last May, the CALC site has attracted 18,000 unique visitors from most federal agencies and a number of vendors -- a significant number for such a specialized app.

With the tool, the government gains much greater visibility into the range of pricing for the same categories. Previously, contracting folks had to sift through paper files or check prices one contract at a time via GSA Advantage. Contracting employees now use CALC to help decide the contract holders from which to request bids on individual orders and to evaluate and/or negotiate once offers are received.

CALC grew out of an initiative by Kelly Bailey, a program manager for professional services contracts in GSA's Region 10. Years ago, his office had developed an internal app that captured data from individual contract prices and exported it to a database, but it was only available to contracting officials in Region 10. Bailey was interested in getting the tool expanded GSA-wide, but approval processes were complicated and slow. He then learned about 18F's work on the GSA Acquisition Gateway and other projects.

Bailey approached 18F in November 2014, and by January 2015, the two sides had already begun collaborating under the kind of interagency agreement 18F normally uses to finance its activities. In a conversation, Bailey expressed amazement at how fast 18F's internal approval processes were. The technical challenge was to scale up the ability to export contractor data into an app so it could become much more widely accessed.

Exposure to 18F widened Bailey's ambition. The developers "leapfrogged what we expected," he recalled. "My original idea was to give access to the whole GSA, but 18F suggested a web-based solution that could give access outside of GSA to the whole government. 18F likes to make projects very open. When we talked about that, a new vision for CALC opened up."

Bailey acted as product owner, approving prioritization of features and authorizing releases. 18F organized the technical development and the feedback sessions with potential users. Bailey said he has no complaints about the collaboration and no perceptions of arrogance from the young 18F employees.

The 18F point person was a young staffer named Nick Brethauer. Before coming to 18F in May 2014, Brethauer worked at the Sunlight Foundation, a nonprofit organization that advocates more government transparency. He completed a master's degree in information management at the University of Maryland and worked in freelance design and consulting.

Why did he take the job at 18F? "I thought it was a fantastic opportunity to have a big, positive impact in services, to improve government for citizens as well as government employees," Brethauer said.

Working on the project with 18F also gave Bailey his first chance to practice agile development. "I didn't understand how agile was different from traditional project management, so I asked them what books I should read to make sure we were on the same page," he said.

In traditional development, everyone works from a large list of requirements and estimates of how long everything takes. Agile focuses on short sprints. Developers often avoid saying they will have all the features built by a certain time because agile stays open to feedback throughout the process. After one sprint, the developers reprioritize for the next sprint. They don't plan entire projects from start to finish.

Agile is attractive, Bailey told me, because it allows developers to make lots of changes based on user feedback as the project progresses. "It's hard for anyone to think of everything that needs to be done or every feature a user might want," he said. "Using agile, we came up with solutions I hadn't thought of. I thought I understood what users wanted, but we got more input from users as we went on instead of trying to get all the requirements at the start."

Bailey cited the development of CALC's icons as an example. "I would have never thought about that, but it came out of a collaborative session called design studio," he said. "Users kept asking if these were worldwide rates, if they were fully burdened, but they were not reading our 'About' page that had those answers. 18F uses a design studio to see how a function will look, and the icons came out of that."

As a result, the new app was not only scaled for governmentwide use but ended up with improved functionality, he added.

A lesson I draw from this is that 18F can be a vehicle for promoting change within federal IT.

CALC is still very much a work in progress. Of special relevance to the IT community, it includes the Mission-Oriented Business Integrated Services contract, but it doesn't yet include IT Schedule 70 or the major GSA governmentwide IT services contracts One Acquisition Solution for Integrated Services and Alliant. Schedule 70 will be added shortly, which will be very helpful. And both 18F and GSA's Region 10 are aware that adding the other vehicles is important.

The other limitation is that the prices on CALC are the ceiling prices in the contract award and do not show what the government actually paid, which often reflects discounts from the maximum prices on the contracts. Getting such data is a challenge for CALC, but there is talk of having GSA change the requirements for how contractors submit data to make prices-paid data possible. That is not just an issue for CALC but for contracting in general.

But even with those shortcomings, CALC is a great start. The contracting and IT communities should make it clear that they would like to take this tool to the next level.

Posted by Steve Kelman on Jan 19, 2016 at 2:26 PM

Cyber. Covered.

Government Cyber Insider tracks the technologies, policies, threats and emerging solutions that shape the cybersecurity landscape.


Reader comments

Thu, Jan 28, 2016

Seems like a small-bore achievement. Can't important Federal agencies produce bigger things--bigger thrusts to not only address, but resolve problems. Some people acclaim Feds for developing tools, updating a rule, setting up daycare at headquarters, blah, blah. All useful, and legal and good. But many would like agencies to really knock our socks off. GSA in particular, takes smaller and smaller bites out of challenges as it back paddles into being a nerd haven and a conduit for contract money, alongside its legendary achievements in managing a lot of Federal office and facility space.

Sun, Jan 24, 2016 Stan Soloway

CALC is a helpful tool that can reduce the resources required to find the full range of already public, but often difficult to find, GSA Schedule prices. But we have to be very careful about the business and use rules associated with a true "prices paid" portal. Such a portal cannot capture the critical nuances that often determine the final pricing on a contract. It cannot capture the circumstances under which a particular requirement was competed or the levels of complexity involved. And, in a world where Low Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) contracting remains an enormous concern among many in government and industry alike, one can only imagine how pricing resulting from an LPTA procurement could distort the marketview offered by a prices paid tool.

Transparency is a good thing; and contracting officers should have easy access to information that will help them make smart and thoughtful decisions. But the history or federal procurement suggests strongly that the creation of such a portal could lead to less, not more, critical thinking. Perhaps our first focus ought to be on how we train and develop the workforce, including dramatically enhancing their market analytics skills, which repeated surveys of gov't acquisition officials have shown remain an area of real concern. They are more than capable; but the training most now undergo simply doesn't meet the need to develop deeper business skills. Once those skills are more prevalent and more central to the acquisition process than we too often see today, a portal such as that GSA is considering might well be a useful tool--because those using it will be far more facile at using it wisely.

Sat, Jan 23, 2016 Jackie Everett

Wonderful effort and love the collaboration on mining the data to get valuable information. The bigger picture is to move to more performance based contracting and know the outputs required and what needs to be measured. This in the end will get our government the required results to move forward in performance based contracting with value to the agencies & tax payers.

Wed, Jan 20, 2016 Jaime Gracia Washington, D.C.

Steve - Great article on the art of the possible, and how an outcome focused approach to the project, along with metrics and objectives in the upfront planning, can have significant impacts on success. Although the CALC tool is not perfect, it is a good tool nonetheless that needs more enhancements and ability for weighted average costs based on possible requirements criteria for better accuracy and realism.

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