Insourcing vs. outsourcing: The pendulum swings again

Two years after the Obama administration began turning back the clock on outsourcing, Congress is resetting it again. But many readers say the situation is a mess no matter how you look at it.

It all comes back to the competitive sourcing process governed by the Office of Management and Budget’s Circular A-76, which is used to give the private sector opportunities to compete for government work that is not considered inherently governmental.

In the past two years, the Obama administration has attempted to reverse a big outsourcing push by the George W. Bush administration, with officials saying the swing toward outsourcing had gone too far and contractors had assumed responsibility for activities best reserved for federal workers. Slowly but surely, many of those jobs have moved back in-house.

But now the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal 2012, which is working its way through Congress, includes several provisions that would pave the way for more outsourcing.

Whichever way the pendulum swings, many readers say the process of comparing the costs of public- versus private-sector work is ineffective.

“It would help this debate if any proposal to insource or outsource were accompanied by an open discussion of what the impacts on costs for the target operation will actually be over time,” Dennis McDonald wrote. “By costs I mean total costs, not just the contract amount or payroll of the affected operation. Also, the administrative overhead and procurement costs should be considered as well.”

Other readers agreed. The online discussions at FCW.com have often involved detailed analyses of how to arrive at accurate dollar amounts by figuring in salaries, benefits, and the various overhead expenses of feds and contractors. But the realities of government contracting can overwhelm even the most diligent studies.

“I went through an A-76 [process], and the contractor won by underbidding the government,” one reader reported. “However, after two years, the contractor was charging the agency twice what it would be paying if the work had stayed in government.”

Another reader ruefully observed that the process is so bureaucratic that it is a money-suck in itself.

“Lots of paperwork has been stamped, filed, submitted, rejected, resubmitted, buried in peat moss for three months and recycled as fire lighters,” the reader wrote. “But nothing has actually been done, and you only have 40 percent of the customer's money left with which to accomplish the mission.”

About the Author

John Monroe is Senior Events Editor for the 1105 Public Sector Media Group, where he is responsible for overseeing the development of content for print and online content, as well as events. John has more than 20 years of experience covering the information technology field. Most recently he served as Editor-in-Chief of Federal Computer Week. Previously, he served as editor of three sister publications: civic.com, which covered the state and local government IT market, Government Health IT, and Defense Systems.

Featured

  • IT Modernization
    Eisenhower Executive Office Building (Image: Wikimedia Commons)

    OMB's user guide to the MGT Act

    The Office of Management and Budget is working on a rules-of-the-road document to cover how agencies can seek and use funds under the MGT Act.

  • global network (Pushish Images/Shutterstock.com)

    As others see us -- a few surprises

    A recent dinner with civil servants from Asia delivered some interesting insights, Steve Kelman writes.

  • FCW Perspectives
    cloud (Singkham/Shutterstock.com)

    A smarter approach to cloud

    Advances in cloud technology are shifting the focus toward choosing the right tool for the job and crafting solutions that truly modernize systems.

Stay Connected

FCW Update

Sign up for our newsletter.

I agree to this site's Privacy Policy.