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. ***