Acquisition Workforce: Agencies Need to Better Define and Track
the Training of Their Employees (29-JUL-02, GAO-02-737).
GAO's work continues to show that some of the government's
largest procurement operations are not run efficiently, either
because requirements are not clearly defined, because prices and
alternatives are not fully considered, or because contracts are
not adequately overseen. At the same time, the ongoing
technological revolution requires a workforce with new knowledge,
skills, and abilities. Moreover, the nature of acquisition is
changing from routine simple buys toward more complex
acquisitions new business practices. Department of Defense (DOD)
has adopted multidisciplinary multifunctional definitions of
their acquisition workforce. The civilian agencies have not. DOD
definitions include contracting officers, contracting officer
representatives, and contracting officer technical
representatives along with other disciplines that play a
significant role in acquisitions, such as program managers,
industrial specialists, and financial administrators. Civilian
agencies include only contract and procurement specialists,
contracting officers, and contracting officer representative in
their acquisition workforce definitions. DOD and the civilian
agencies have developed specific training requirements for their
acquisition workforce and have developed mechanisms to track the
training of acquisition personnel. Three of the civilian agencies
are awaiting implementation of a more sophisticated web-based
governmentwide management information system to help them track
training, but the development of this system has been delayed
considerably. All agencies said they had sufficient funding to
provide current required core training for their acquisition
workforce; however, some expressed concerns about funding
training for future requirements and career development,
particularly because of budget cuts made recently at the Defense
Acquisition University
-------------------------Indexing Terms-------------------------
REPORTNUM: GAO-02-737
ACCNO: A04156
TITLE: Acquisition Workforce: Agencies Need to Better Define and
Track the Training of Their Employees
DATE: 07/29/2002
SUBJECT: Employment or training programs
Contractor personnel
Federal procurement
Federal procurement policy
Human resources training
Personnel management
Training utilization
OFPP Web-based Acquisition Career
Management Information System
******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a **
** GAO Product. **
** **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced. Tables are included, but **
** may not resemble those in the printed version. **
** **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed **
** document's contents. **
** **
******************************************************************
GAO-02-737
Report to the Chairman, Subcommittee on Technology and Procurement Policy,
Committee on Government Reform, House of Representatives
United States General Accounting Office
GAO
July 2002 ACQUISITION WORKFORCE Agencies Need to Better Define and Track
the Training of Their Employees
GAO- 02- 737
Page i GAO- 02- 737 Acquisition Workforce Letter 1
Results in Brief 2 Background 3 DOD Has a Broader Definition of
Acquisition Workforce 5 Every Agency Has Established Training Requirements
8 Various Mechanisms Used to Ensure Training Requirements Met 9 Agencies
Were Able to Fund Current Training Needs but Some
Cited Concerns 11 Conclusions 12 Recommendations for Executive Action 13
Agency Comments and Our Evaluation 13 Scope and Methodology 14
Appendix I Comments from the Office of Federal Procurement Policy 16
Appendix II Comments from the Department of Energy 18
Appendix III Comments from the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration 20
Appendix IV Comments from the Department of Veterans Affairs 22
Tables
Table 1: Key Acquisition Training Legislation and Administrative Actions 4
Table 2: Personnel Included in Each Defined Acquisition
Workforce Position within the Selected Agencies Reviewed 7 Contents
Page ii GAO- 02- 737 Acquisition Workforce Abbreviations
ACMIS Acquisition Career Management Information System COR contracting
officer representative COTR contracting officer technical representative
DAU Defense Acquisition University DOD Department of Defense DOE
Department of Energy FAI Federal Acquisition Institute GSA General
Services Administration HHS Department of Health and Human Services NASA
National Aeronautics and Space Administration OFPP Office of Federal
Procurement Policy VA Department of Veterans Affairs
Page 1 GAO- 02- 737 Acquisition Workforce
July 29, 2002 The Honorable Tom Davis Chairman, Subcommittee on Technology
and Procurement Policy Committee on Government Reform House of
Representatives
Dear Mr. Chairman: Having the right people with the right skills is
critical to ensuring the government receives the best value for the $200
billion it spends each year for goods and services. But achieving this has
been difficult. Our work continues to show that some of the government*s
largest procurement operations are not always run efficiently, either
because requirements are not clearly defined, because prices and
alternatives are not fully considered, or because contracts are not
adequately overseen. 1 At the same time, the ongoing technological
revolution requires a workforce with new knowledge, skills, and abilities.
Moreover, the nature of acquisition is changing from routine simple buys
toward more complex acquisitions, such as information technology services,
and toward new business practices, such as performance- based contracting
and the use of purchase cards.
To ensure an adequate professional acquisition workforce, the Congress
enacted a series of reforms in the 1990s, which required agencies to
establish policies and procedures for effective management and training of
their acquisition workforce, to include certain positions in the
definition of the acquisition workforce, and to establish qualification,
educational, and training requirements for positions identified as part of
the acquisition workforce. You asked us to assess agency progress in this
regard. Particularly, you asked us to determine whether agencies have (1)
definitions of their acquisition workforces that include all significant
acquisition- related functions as required by the Congress, (2)
established training requirements for these workforces, (3) a means for
ensuring that those requirements are met, and (4) allocated sufficient
funding to provide required training.
1 See U. S General Accounting Office, High Risk Series: An Update, GAO-
01- 263, (Washington, D. C.: Jan. 2001).
United States General Accounting Office Washington, DC 20548
Page 2 GAO- 02- 737 Acquisition Workforce
Our review focused on the Department of Defense (DOD); the Departments of
the Army, Navy, and Air Force; the Departments of Veterans Affairs (VA),
Energy (DOE), Health and Human Services (HHS); the General Services
Administration (GSA); and the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA). These agencies represented 87 percent of total
contract dollars obligated in fiscal year 2000 and employed 82 percent of
the government*s contract specialists and purchasing agents, which are the
primary career fields in the acquisition workforce.
DOD and the military services have adopted multidisciplinary,
multifunctional definitions of their acquisition workforce. 2 The civilian
agencies have not. DOD and the military services* definitions include
contracting officers, 3 contracting officer representatives, and
contracting officer technical representatives 4 along with other
disciplines that play a significant role in acquisitions, such as program
managers, industrial specialists, and financial administrators. Civilian
agencies generally include only contract and procurement specialists,
contracting officers, and contracting officer representatives in their
acquisition workforce definitions. Acquisition officials in two of the
five civilian agencies we reviewed explained that use of a broader
definition would be difficult given that they do not have the authority to
establish and monitor training for other functional areas. However, other
agencies with similar concerns have taken steps to address this issue.
Also, in some cases, agencies established training for certain
acquisition- related positions even though they were not formally included
in their acquisition workforce definitions.
DOD and the civilian agencies have developed specific training
requirements for their acquisition workforce. They have also developed a
variety of mechanisms to track the training of acquisition personnel.
Three of the civilian agencies are awaiting implementation of a more
sophisticated Web- based governmentwide management information system to
help them track training, but the deployment of this system has
2 DOD officially refers to its acquisition workforce as the acquisition
technology and logistics workforce. 3 Contracting officers are federal
employees with the authority to bind the government by signing a contract.
This authority is delegated to them through *warrants* issued by the head
of their contracting activity. 4 Contracting officer representatives
(CORs) and contracting officer technical
representatives (COTRs) are federal employees designated by the
contracting officer to perform certain contract administration duties.
Results in Brief
Page 3 GAO- 02- 737 Acquisition Workforce
been delayed considerably. Lastly, all agencies we reviewed said they had
sufficient funding to provide current required core training for their
acquisition workforce; however, some expressed concerns about funding
training for future requirements and career development, particularly
because of budget cuts made recently at the Defense Acquisition University
(DAU). 5
We are making recommendations to the Administrator of the Office of
Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP) concerning identification of all
acquisition- related positions and development of a management information
system. In written comments on a draft of this report, the Administrator
of OFPP generally concurred with our recommendations. We also received
written comments from DOE, NASA, and VA and comments by e- mail from DOD,
HHS, and GSA. All agencies generally agreed with our findings.
The Congress and others have been addressing the question of how to
strengthen the acquisition workforce since 1974 when the OFPP was created
to establish governmentwide procurement policies for executive agencies.
One of the primary responsibilities of this office and its Federal
Acquisition Institute (FAI) 6 is to strengthen acquisition workforce
training. The concern about the quality of the acquisition workforce
deepened in the 1990s, as it became clear that the government was
experiencing significant contracting failures partly because it lacked
skilled personnel to manage and oversee contracts. There was also concern
that program managers and other personnel integral to the success of the
acquisition process were only marginally involved with the contracts. Two
of the most significant steps taken in this regard were the passage of the
Defense Acquisition Workforce Improvement Act in 1990 and the Clinger-
Cohen Act in 1996. The Defense Acquisition Workforce Improvement Act,
among other things, provided specific guidance on DOD*s acquisition
workforce definition. The Clinger- Cohen Act required civilian agencies to
establish acquisition workforce definitions. Those definitions were to
include contract and procurement specialist positions 7 and other
positions *in
5 The DAU is the primary provider of acquisition training for DOD and the
military services and, in some cases, provides training for civilian
agencies. 6 FAI, under OFPP*s direction, is charged with supporting and
continuing the development
of a competent professional civilian acquisition workforce. 7
Specifically, the act identified positions in the General Schedule
Contracting series (GS1102)
and in the General Schedule Purchasing series (GS- 1105). Background
Page 4 GAO- 02- 737 Acquisition Workforce
which significant acquisition- related functions are performed.* The
Clinger- Cohen Act also required civilian agencies to collect standardized
information on their acquisition workforce and establish education,
training, and experience requirements that are *comparable to those
established for the same or equivalent positions* in DOD and the military
services. Table 1 provides more details on this act and other legislation
and federal agency initiatives.
Table 1: Key Acquisition Training Legislation and Administrative Actions
The Office of Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP) Act, P. L. 93- 400,
codified in 41 U. S. C. S:401 et seq.
This act created OFPP within the Office of Management and Budget to
provide governmentwide leadership for agencies other than DOD in
procurement matters. The act was amended to establish FAI, which under the
direction of OFPP, was to, among other things, (1) promote the development
of the acquisition workforce, (2) analyze acquisition career fields to
identify competencies for acquisition positions, and (3) develop training
courses. The Defense Acquisition Workforce Improvement Act, P. L. 101-
510, codified in 10 U. S. C. S:1701 et seq.
This act recognized acquisition as a multidisciplinary career field for
DOD comprised of 11 functional areas * program management; systems
planning, research, development, engineering, and testing; procurement,
including contracting; industrial property management; logistics; quality
control and assurance; manufacturing and production; business, cost
estimating, financial management, and auditing; education, training, and
career development; construction; and joint development and production
with other government agencies and foreign countries. The act also
directed the Secretary of Defense to establish minimum education,
training, and experience requirements, and a defense acquisition
university structure. OFPP Policy Letter 92- 3 In implementing the
acquisition workforce provisions of the OFPP Act, this guidance
established a standard set of contracting competencies and identified
specific training requirements for personnel in the contracting and
purchasing occupational series and contracting officers. The Clinger-
Cohen Act of 1996, P. L. 104- 106, codified in 41 U. S. C. S:433 et seq.
This act requires civilian agencies, in consultation with OFPP, to
establish education,
training, and experience requirements for civilian agencies* acquisition
workforce and to ensure uniform implementation of policies and procedures
among components to the maximum extent practicable. The act also requires
OFPP to establish minimum qualification requirements and to ensure that
agencies collect and maintain standardized information on the acquisition
workforce. OFPP Policy Letter 97- 01 In implementing provisions of the
Clinger- Cohen Act, this guidance requires agencies
to (1) identify and publish model career paths and (2) establish
education, core training, and experience requirements for enumerated
acquisition personnel. The letter defined the *acquisition workforce* to
include contracting and purchasing, contracting officers, CORs, and COTRs;
it also stated that the Administrator of OFPP would *consult with the
agencies in the identification of other acquisition related positions.*
Furthermore this policy letter delegated to FAI the responsibility for
developing, with the agencies and the Office of Personnel Management, a
governmentwide management information system that would allow agencies to
collect and maintain acquisition workforce information including the
employees* completion of all core training courses.
Source: GAO*s analysis.
OFPP Policy Letter 97- 01 directs executive agencies to establish core
training for entry and advancement in the acquisition workforce. Agencies
normally establish specific core training required to meet the standards
for
Page 5 GAO- 02- 737 Acquisition Workforce
certification in each career field in their acquisition workforce (e. g.,
contracting officers, CORs, and COTRs). For contracting officers, agencies
usually establish several warrant levels, 8 with specified contracting
authority for each level. 9 Agencies issue permanent warrants only to
contracting officers who have completed the core training required for
each warrant level and who have the necessary work experience and formal
education. Because contracting officers* warrant levels generally
correspond to their grade levels, employees* career development and
advancement is dependent on attending and passing required core training
courses. The OFPP policy letter also established continuing education
requirements for contract specialists and contracting officers.
DOD includes a wide variety of disciplines* ranging from contracting, to
technical, to financial, to program staff* in its acquisition workforce
definition, but civilian agencies have employed narrower definitions that
are largely limited to staff involved in awarding and administering
contracts. Having a broader definition is important because it is one
method to facilitate agencies* efforts to ensure that training reaches all
staff integral to the success of a contract. While most civilian agencies
acknowledge that the acquisition process requires the efforts of multiple
functions and disciplines beyond those in traditional contracting offices,
few have broadened their definitions of the acquisition workforce to
include them. Officials at two agencies we reviewed said that they had not
broadened their definitions because officials responsible for managing the
acquisition workforce did not have management responsibility for or
control of the training of individuals in offices other than their own.
DOD is required by the Defense Acquisition Workforce Improvement Act to
include, at a minimum, all acquisition- related positions in 11 specified
functional areas in its definition of its acquisition workforce. It is
also required to include acquisition- related positions in *management
headquarters activities and in management headquarters support
activities.* Therefore, DOD*s acquisition workforce includes contracting,
8 Warrants are the contracting officer*s certificate of authority to enter
into, administer, or terminate contracts and make related determinations
and findings. 9 Contracting authority is the dollar amount a contracting
officer is authorized to obligate
the government for purchasing goods and services. DOD Has a Broader
Definition of Acquisition Workforce
DOD Has a Multifunctional and Multidisciplinary Definition of Acquisition
Workforce
Page 6 GAO- 02- 737 Acquisition Workforce
program, technical, budget, financial, logistics, scientific, and
engineering personnel.
DOD uses a methodology, known as the Refined Packard methodology, 10 to
identify its acquisition workforce personnel. Using the Refined Packard
methodology, DOD now includes personnel in its acquisition workforce from
three categories: (1) specific occupations that are presumed to be
performing acquisition- related work no matter what organization the
employee is in, 11 (2) a combination of an employee*s occupational series
and the organization in which the employee works, and (3) specific
additions and deletions to the first two categories. 12 DOD is currently
coding the positions and employees identified by the Refined Packard
methodology into its official personnel systems. DOD components and the
military services* estimate that the number of personnel included in the
acquisition workforce will expand when the coding is completed in October
2002.
All the civilian agencies we reviewed include personnel in the contract
specialist and purchasing agent job series as specified by the
ClingerCohen Act. All agencies also include contracting officers and three
include CORs and COTRs as required in OFPP*s policy enumerating
acquisitionrelated positions. Every civilian agency includes additional
positions in which contracting functions are performed, such as property
disposal or procurement clerks. However, only VA and DOE include positions
in which acquisition- related functions are performed (i. e., program
managers). Table 2 shows how the agencies defined their acquisition
workforces.
10 The methodology was based on an earlier approach developed in 1986 for
the President*s Blue Ribbon Commission on Defense Management, otherwise
known as the Packard Commission. 11 Civilian personnel (General Schedule)
positions in this category are: GS- 246 Contractor
Industrial Relations, GS- 340 Program Management, GS- 1102 Contracting,
GS- 1103 Industrial Property, GS- 1105 Purchasing Specialist, and GS- 1150
Industrial Specialist. 12 In making its determinations, DOD looked at the
function* such as planning, design, production deployment, or logistics
support*- and the duties involved*- such as documenting mission needs,
establishing performance goals, prioritizing resource requirements, and
planning and executing acquisition programs. Civilian Agencies*
Acquisition Workforce Definitions Generally Limited to Contracting
Functions
Page 7 GAO- 02- 737 Acquisition Workforce
Table 2: Personnel Included in Each Defined Acquisition Workforce Position
within the Selected Agencies Reviewed
Agency Contract
specialists (GS- 1102)
Purchasing specialists (GS- 1105) Contracting
officers COR/ COTR Other acquisition
related positions
DOE Yes Yes Yes Yes Financial assistant specialists Property managers
Program managers a GSA Yes Yes Yes Yes Property disposal
Procurement clerks HHS Yes Yes Yes b No c Procurement clerks NASA Yes Yes
Yes b No c Procurement clerks VA Yes Yes Yes d Yes Program managers
Procurement clerks a DOE commonly refers to program managers as project
managers.
b All contracting officers are contract specialists (GS- 1102) or
purchasing specialists (GS- 1105). c COR and COTRs are not included in the
acquisition workforce because they are not under the direct supervision of
officials responsible for the acquisition workforce. d VA includes
purchase cardholders with contract authority above the micropurchase
threshold in its Contracting Officer category. Source: GAO*s analysis of
agency provided data.
Agencies are aware of the need to expand their definitions to include all
positions in which *significant acquisition- related functions are
performed,* as required by the Clinger- Cohen Act. To assist agencies in
this effort, OFPP Policy Letter 97- 01 identified acquisition workforce
positions, in addition to contracting and purchasing specialists, to
include contracting officers, CORs, and COTRs. Furthermore, OFPP Policy
Letter 97- 01 stated that the Administrator would *consult with the
agencies in the identification of other acquisition related positions.*
All agencies include positions other than those enumerated in the Clinger-
Cohen Act and OFPP policy, and GSA plans to do so. Specifically:
VA includes program managers and procurement clerks in its definition.
DOE includes program managers and property managers in its definition.
HHS and NASA include procurement clerks in their definitions.
GSA is identifying and including other acquisition- related positions in
its acquisition workforce and expects to include program managers and
other positions in the future, but GSA has not established a firm time
frame.
NASA asserted that managing a much wider range of acquisition personnel,
including *other equivalent positions,* such as CORs and
Page 8 GAO- 02- 737 Acquisition Workforce
COTRs, would be much more difficult than current practice because agency
managers responsible for acquisition workforce training did not have
authority over personnel in offices other than theirs to require they take
specific training courses. However, HHS, which has CORs and COTRs (which
it refers to as project officers) not under control of the acquisition
office, established regulations requiring the head of each contracting
activity ensure their CORs and COTRs receive specified training. In
addition, DOE, which has similar oversight concerns, has established an
*umbrella* directive governing acquisition career development. Two
offices, the Acquisition Career Development Program office and the Project
Management Career Development Program office, monitor the training of
employees in their respective career fields.
Every agency we reviewed has established specific training requirements
for each position identified in their acquisition workforce. The Defense
Acquisition Workforce Improvement Act and the Clinger- Cohen Act
established similar career management requirements, including education,
experience, and training requirements employees must meet to qualify for
each acquisition workforce position. These requirements are further
defined, for DOD, by DOD regulations and other guidance, and for the
civilian agencies by OFPP and the agencies* own regulations. Two agencies
also established training requirements for acquisition- related positions
not formally included in their acquisition workforce definitions.
The DAU develops curricula, approved by the Under Secretary of Defense
(Acquisition, Technology & Logistics), that include descriptions of the
education, experience, and core training required to meet the standards
for certification in each acquisition career field. In addition, DAU
offers assignment- specific training. Annually, advisors from each DOD
career field determine whether certification standards and assignment-
specific training requirements should be updated and whether training
curricula are current. Any changes must be approved by the Director of
Acquisition Education, Training, and Career Development before they are
published in the DAU catalog. The DAU curriculum includes courses
identified by the Under Secretary of Defense (Acquisition, Technology &
Logistics) as integral to the education and training of personnel in
identified positions. These courses are intended to provide unique
acquisition knowledge for specific assignments, jobs, or positions;
maintain proficiency; and remain current with legislation, regulation, and
policy. They also cover topics such as program management, systems
acquisition, construction, and advanced contract pricing. Every Agency Has
Established Training Requirements
Page 9 GAO- 02- 737 Acquisition Workforce
OFPP*s FAI develops training and career development programs for civilian
agency acquisition workforce personnel. Specifically, FAI developed the
contracting and procurement curriculum for the acquisition workforce,
worked closely with DAU in its course development, and coordinated with
colleges and universities to identify and develop education programs for
the acquisition workforce. In addition, FAI is developing several Web-
based courses for various acquisition personnel.
All DOD agencies follow the DAU curriculum. Some civilian agencies,
including NASA and DOE, also follow the DAU curriculum for the contracting
and purchasing functions. Other agencies, including GSA and VA, have
developed training programs and courses that follow the curriculum
established by FAI. While HHS has awarded contracts to teach courses for
its own acquisition workforce, the curriculum and course contents are
modeled on those developed by FAI.
The civilian agencies we reviewed all had policies describing the
education and training requirements for each member of their acquisition
workforce. Even when agencies do not include all positions that play a
role in their acquisition process in their acquisition workforce, they
established education and training requirements for those positions. For
instance, NASA and HHS, which do not include COTRs in their acquisition
workforce, established training requirements for that position.
To ensure training requirements are being met, DOD and the military
services use a centralized management information system that is
automatically updated with training and personnel data. The civilian
agencies use less sophisticated spreadsheet programs to collect and
maintain information on the education, training, and continuing education
received by their acquisition workforce. At least once a year, each agency
collects data from its regional offices and/ or contracting components and
consolidates the data into its tracking system.
Although we obtained data from DOD and the civilian agencies to determine
the various elements collected, we did not assess the reliability or
adequacy of their systems. Our purpose was to ascertain that DOD and the
civilian agencies maintained data on the training received by their
acquisition workforce and not to validate the accuracy of that data. While
Various Mechanisms
Used to Ensure Training Requirements Met
Page 10 GAO- 02- 737 Acquisition Workforce
we have reported weaknesses in the data maintained by VA and GSA, 13 those
agencies are taking action to improve the reliability and completeness of
their tracking systems.
Civilian agencies said that they did not have centralized management
information systems because they were awaiting development and
implementation of OFPP*s proposed Web- based Acquisition Career Management
Information System (ACMIS), expected to be available in September 2002.
The civilian agencies, with the exception of VA, viewed their systems as
being interim. As a result of not having a centralized management
information system, these agencies must rely on the data submitted
periodically by training coordinators in their various locations
throughout their agencies. Also, this data is often maintained on
unofficial manual records or on various spreadsheets, making it difficult
for the responsible acquisition officer to verify its accuracy. Because of
ACMIS development delays, VA developed its own management information
system to alleviate these problems, and it is currently entering
historical employee training data into the database.
ACMIS is to be a federal Web- accessible database of records to track
acquisition workforce training and education. It is expected that the data
in ACMIS will be used in making budgeting, staffing, and training
decisions and monitoring the status of staff warrants. The baseline data
for ACMIS will come from the Office of Personnel Management*s Centralized
Data Personnel File and agency workforce databases. Those records will
then be supplemented with education, training, warrant, and certification
data provided by individuals in the acquisition workforce. In addition,
the system is to provide for computer- to- computer interfaces for bulk
and automated data transfers (i. e., updates from agency personnel files
or updates of multiple employee records with a common set of data, such as
the completion of a course).
The development of the new system, however, has experienced considerable
delays. Although OFPP tasked FAI to develop the system in September 1997,
it has not yet been implemented. In 2000, we reported that delays in
developing the system were largely attributable to difficulties in
obtaining agreement on the requirements for the system.
13 See U. S. General Accounting Office. Acquisition Reform: GSA and VA
Efforts to Improve Training of Their Acquisition Workforces, GAO/ GGD- 00-
66, (Washington, D. C.: Feb. 18, 2000).
Page 11 GAO- 02- 737 Acquisition Workforce
Since our report, FAI, under OFPP direction, has published functional
specifications and data requirements for the system. In December 2001, FAI
contracted for development of the system, and FAI officials said the
contractor was on track to meet the September 2002 implementation.
While DOD and the agencies we reviewed had varying degrees of funding
available, all reported that they managed to meet their acquisition
workforces* current required training needs. However, we did not review or
validate acquisition workforce training budget and obligation data.
Officials explained that knowing what training courses employees will
need, determining the courses that will be provided to meet training
needs, and knowing the costs of providing each course, including related
travel costs, allowed them to establish the funding required for needed
training. DOD employs a centralized approach in determining its funding
requirements for acquisition workforce training for its services and
components. 14 Using its management information system and estimated
costs, DOD and the military services and components go through the
iterative process of reconciling course needs, class size, instructor
availability, and other costs, such as travel. DAU funds (1) the cost of
developing and presenting the courses and (2) the travel expenses for DOD
employees attending the courses. The civilian agencies we reviewed employ
similar procedures relying on the data available to them in their interim
systems comprised of spreadsheets and unofficial manual records.
DOD, the military services, and civilian agencies stated they had
sufficient funds to meet their current minimum core training requirements.
NASA and HHS reported making acquisition workforce training a priority and
earmarking sufficient funds for it. Other agencies* GSA and VA* said that
because they use revolving funds to pay for their training, they also had
sufficient funds earmarked for their acquisition workforce training.
However, DOE, which reported having limited funds for training, often
relied on DOD and NASA courses provided free of charge, on a space
available basis, for much of its acquisition training.
Although they could fund current core training, DOD, the military
services, and DOE* because they rely on DAU for much of their training*
expressed
14 The term *DOD components* refers to agencies not within the military
services, such as the Defense Contract Audit Agency, the Defense Contract
Management Agency, and the Defense Logistics Agency. Agencies Were Able to
Fund Current Training Needs but Some Cited Concerns
Page 12 GAO- 02- 737 Acquisition Workforce
concerns with their ability to meet future required training and career
development needs of their employees, since DAU faces budget reductions.
15 A DOD official noted that fiscal year 2001 budget reductions combined
with 2 years of *straight- line* budgets have precluded DAU from providing
all the courses requested by the DOD components. Also, while all employees
received core training for their current positions and grades, they were
often unable to receive core training needed to obtain warrants at the
next higher level to allow them to work on larger contracts and to be
competitive for promotion to a higher grade. Army and Navy officials cited
similar concerns regarding DAU*s budget reductions. Air Force officials
stated that anticipated increases in the acquisition workforce, because of
the implementation of the Refined Packard methodology, the replacement of
retirees, and its planned increases in cross training between acquisition
specialties to meet strategic objectives, would require additional funding
for core training in the future.
A DOE official said that DAU*s budget cuts also potentially affect DOE*s
ability to meet its future training requirements because of its reliance
on DAU- provided courses. The official also noted that DOE*s limited
training funds have curtailed funding tuitions for college courses, intern
programs, continuing education, as well as management and leadership
development programs, which could have an impact on the acquisition
workforce*s career development. Other agencies reviewed did not indicate
concerns about future training and career development.
DOD and the military services have a more broadly defined acquisition
workforce, including functions beyond the traditional contracting
function. Civilian agencies* definitions are narrower. Regardless of
whether or not an agency determines to include a particular position in
its acquisition workforce, each agency needs to take active steps to
identify all those positions that have a role in the acquisition process
important enough to warrant specific training. This knowledge can be fed
into the agencies* strategic planning efforts and increases their ability
to provide human capital strategies to meet their current and future
programmatic needs. The challenge for civilian agencies ensuring their
acquisition workforce is receiving the proper training has been made more
difficult by
15 Congress reduced DAU*s fiscal year 2002 budget of $100 million by $5
million. The Office of the Secretary of Defense cut another $5 million.
The Under Secretary of Defense (Acquisition, Technology & Logistics) plans
to supplement DAU*s budget by $3. 5 million. Conclusions
Page 13 GAO- 02- 737 Acquisition Workforce
OFPP*s slow progress in implementing ACMIS. Continued delays in
implementing this system will increase the time in which agencies have to
use less sophisticated tools for tracking acquisition workforce training.
In an effort to ensure agencies succeed in defining a multifunctional and
multidimensional acquisition workforce, we recommend that the
Administrator of OFPP work with all the agencies to determine the
appropriateness of further refining the definition of the acquisition
workforce and to determine which positions, though not formally included
in the acquisition workforce, nonetheless require certain training to
ensure their role in the acquisition process is performed efficiently and
effectively.
We also recommend that the Administrator of OFPP continue to monitor the
ACMIS contract milestones to ensure that the contractor and FAI complete
and implement the proposed governmentwide system on schedule.
We received written comments on a draft of this report from the
Administrator of OFPP. She generally concurred with our recommendations
and made observations about OFPP*s efforts regarding the acquisition
workforce (see appendix I). However, the Administrator took issue with our
conclusion that delays in implementing the ACMIS system caused
difficulties in ensuring the civilian agencies acquisition workforce is
trained. The Administrator noted that, despite the absence of a
centralized system, the agencies are responsible for managing the training
of their workforce. Our recommendations are intended to help ensure that
all staff integral to the success of agencies* acquisition efforts receive
appropriate training. Also, as we noted in the report, the civilian
agencies said they had not developed centralized management information
systems because they were awaiting the implementation of OFPP*s proposed
governmentwide system that OFPP originally tasked FAI to develop in
September 1997.
We also received written comments from DOE, NASA, and VA and comments via
e- mail from DOD, HHS, and GSA as discussed below. All agencies generally
agreed with our findings.
DOE concurred with our findings and offered additional technical comments
regarding the inclusion of financial assistant specialists in its
acquisition workforce and the status of certification and training
Recommendations for
Executive Action Agency Comments and Our Evaluation
Page 14 GAO- 02- 737 Acquisition Workforce
requirements for personnel in its acquisition workforce. We incorporated
these comments where appropriate. DOE*s comments appear in appendix II.
NASA noted that it included procurement clerks in its acquisition
workforce. We changed the report to reflect this. NASA also provided
additional specific information regarding the training required of those
acquisition personnel not included in its acquisition workforce
definition. NASA*s comments appear in appendix III.
VA concurred with our findings and noted the release of its Procurement
Reform Task Force Report, which addresses the need for acquisition
workforce enhancements. VA*s comments appear in appendix IV.
DOD provided several technical comments and suggestions to clarify our
draft report. We incorporated these comments and suggestions where
appropriate.
HHS concurred with our findings and provided technical comments. HHS noted
that although certain acquisition personnel are not under the control of
its acquisition office, that office has established regulations to ensure
they receive required training. We believe our report adequately reflects
their concerns.
GSA stated it had reviewed our report and had no comments. To accomplish
the objectives, we reviewed policies and procedures, examined records, and
interviewed acquisition personnel, training, and budget officials at DOD,
Army, Navy, Air Force; VA, DOE, HHS, GSA, and NASA. However, we did not
attempt to determine the adequacy or timeliness of the training these
agencies provided their employees. These agencies are the largest in terms
of their annual expenditures and among the largest in terms of the number
of people in their acquisition workforce. In fiscal year 2000, their
acquisition workforce included almost 25, 000 contract specialists and
purchasing agents (the primary career fields in the acquisition
workforce), who were responsible for nearly $200 billion in federal
obligations for goods and services.
To obtain information on the oversight and guidance provided to federal
agencies, we reviewed legislation, regulations, directives, and policies
and interviewed officials at OFPP and FAI. Scope and
Methodology
Page 15 GAO- 02- 737 Acquisition Workforce
We conducted our review between October 2001 and June 2002 in accordance
with generally accepted government auditing standards.
As agreed with your office, unless you publicly announce the contents of
this report earlier, we plan no further distribution of it until 30 days
from the date of this letter. At that time, we will send copies to other
interested congressional committees, the secretaries of Defense, Army, Air
Force, Navy, Energy, Health and Human Services, and Veterans Affairs; and
the administrators of General Services Administration and the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration, and the Office of Federal
Procurement Policy. We will also make copies available to others upon
request. In addition, the report will be available at no charge on the GAO
Web site at http:// www. gao. gov.
Please contact me at (202) 512- 4125 or Hilary Sullivan at (214) 777- 5652
if you have any questions regarding this report. Major contributors to
this report were Thom Barger, Cristina Chaplain, Susan Ragland, Sylvia
Schatz, and Tanisha Stewart.
Sincerely yours, David E. Cooper Director Acquisition and Sourcing
Management
Appendix I: Comments from the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Page 16
GAO- 02- 737 Acquisition Workforce
Appendix I: Comments from the Office of Federal Procurement Policy
Appendix I: Comments from the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Page 17
GAO- 02- 737 Acquisition Workforce
Appendix II: Comments from the Department of Energy
Page 18 GAO- 02- 737 Acquisition Workforce
Appendix II: Comments from the Department of Energy
Appendix II: Comments from the Department of Energy
Page 19 GAO- 02- 737 Acquisition Workforce
Appendix III: Comments from the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration Page 20 GAO- 02- 737 Acquisition Workforce
Appendix III: Comments from the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration
Appendix III: Comments from the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration Page 21 GAO- 02- 737 Acquisition Workforce
Appendix IV: Comments from the Department of Veterans Affairs
Page 22 GAO- 02- 737 Acquisition Workforce
Appendix IV: Comments from the Department of Veterans Affairs
(120085)
The General Accounting Office, the investigative arm of Congress, exists
to support Congress in meeting its constitutional responsibilities and to
help improve the performance and accountability of the federal government
for the American people. GAO examines the use of public funds; evaluates
federal programs and policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and
other assistance to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and
funding decisions. GAO*s commitment to good government is reflected in its
core values of accountability, integrity, and reliability.
The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost
is through the Internet. GAO*s Web site (www. gao. gov) contains abstracts
and fulltext files of current reports and testimony and an expanding
archive of older products. The Web site features a search engine to help
you locate documents using key words and phrases. You can print these
documents in their entirety, including charts and other graphics.
Each day, GAO issues a list of newly released reports, testimony, and
correspondence. GAO posts this list, known as *Today*s Reports,* on its
Web site daily. The list contains links to the full- text document files.
To have GAO e- mail this list to you every afternoon, go to www. gao. gov
and select *Subscribe to daily E- mail alert for newly released products*
under the GAO Reports heading.
The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2
each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of
Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or more
copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders should
be sent to:
U. S. General Accounting Office 441 G Street NW, Room LM Washington, D. C.
20548
To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512- 6000 TDD: (202) 512- 2537 Fax: (202)
512- 6061
Contact: Web site: www. gao. gov/ fraudnet/ fraudnet. htm E- mail:
fraudnet@ gao. gov Automated answering system: (800) 424- 5454 or (202)
512- 7470
Jeff Nelligan, managing director, NelliganJ@ gao. gov (202) 512- 4800 U.
S. General Accounting Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 Washington, D. C.
20548 GAO*s Mission
Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony
Order by Mail or Phone To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal
Programs
Public Affairs
*** End of document. ***