Thursday, April 29, 2010
Industry Talk: Best Value Versus Lowest Price Technically Acceptable
Brooks further noted that IPOA believes it is unwise to require cost to be considered the ultimate driver in federal procurement, for doing so simply creates a “race to the bottom” where other qualifications are not given due consideration. “We believe that the proposed amendment will result in more contract defaults, poor performance and an overall decrease in the quality of goods and services provided to the services.”
*****
Interesting debate. Doug took the side of the Commission on Wartime Contracting, and POGO is doing their own thing. My thoughts on it all is who wants the lowest bidder protecting them in a war zone? I mean if you were to look at what happened with AGNA in Kabul, or what I call the Kabul Fiasco, that is a prime example of how lowest bidder contracting does not work. In that ‘race to the bottom’, AGNA sure did win that contract, but they also created an impossible environment for their guard force to operate in.( I will spare you the party photos)
I also put in this post, what POGO thought about best value, and why they support the LPTAO(Lowest-Price Technically Acceptable Offer). They think that if the government would have specified what they thought was technically acceptable in the contract, that the Kabul Fiasco could have been avoided in the first place. I think they make an excellent point as well, but yet again, I refer to the common saying ‘you get what you pay for’. I would ask Danielle over at POGO if she would like to be protected by the lowest bidder in a war zone? Would you want the best protecting you, or would you want what was technically acceptable? Do you want the best doctor for the money, or do you want a doctor who is cheap and barely got through medical school-but can still practice medicine?
Plus, when you put the responsibility of deciding what is technically acceptable in the hands of individuals who are being pressured by their management or politics, to reduce cost, what is the limit to what is technically acceptable in their view? Of course you don’t want to overspend for a task, but when there is an environment/culture in government to only seek the cheapest price for a task and not consider other factors, I think that could lead to some serious problems.
Another example of how LPTAO sucks, is the TWISS contracts. Someone in the chain of contracting command, determined what is technically acceptable in regards to the guard force protecting troops under TWISS. What that process has produced is Ugandans or Kenyans standing guard at the gates of FOBs, who are getting paid peanuts and receive minimum training or vetting. All because the government has deemed that the companies supplying these troops are authorized to do so. If you talk to contractors who have worked this contract, they will tell you how incredibly screwed up it is.(the management will tell you it is a glowing success, go figure. lol) But it is all technically acceptable to the powers that be to allow the companies to run the TWISS stuff that way, and the companies keep ‘racing to the bottom’ to win that contract. (I get more emails from guys and gals who are just pissed off about how poor of a contract TWISS is–more than the Kabul embassy contract)
Overall, we should contract these services with a number of factors in mind. Past performance should count, as does cost. Experience in protecting people, and having the technical ability to do so is another. We should pick the best value companies for dangerous war zone duty, much like a patient would pick a doctor for their life saving diagnosis and care. I do think lowest bidder works for some contracts, like leaf raking or sweeping up a garage–stuff where lives are not on the line. But for protecting people in highly complex and dangerous war zones, where lives and government reputation is on the line, you probably want a system of contracting in place in which the government gets the best forces they can get for the money. That’s if they care about the protection of their reputation and people out there?
The government should also focus on getting plenty of competent contracting officers who can managing these contracts, to ensure that the government continues to get a good deal. Unfortunately, the government has been applying lowest bidder mindset to their contracting officer corps, in the form of not paying enough for that job, and not doing the things necessary to build up and strengthen that essential tool of government contracting. –Matt
—————————————————————–
IPOA Opposes IMPROVE Act Amendment to End Best Value Competitions
Stability Operations Trade Association Advocates For Use of “Best Value” in Defense Procurement
WASHINGTON-On April 27, 2010, IPOA, the Association of the Stability Operations Industry, sent a letter to the Chairman and Ranking Members of the House Armed Services Committee urging them to oppose a proposed amendment to H.R. 5013 – Implementing Management for Performance and Related Reforms to Obtain Value in Every Acquisition Act of 2010 (IMPROVE Act of 2010). The association asked the congressional leaders to reject an amendment entitled “Requirement that Cost or Price to the Federal Government Be Given at Least Equal Importance as Technical or Other Criteria in Evaluating Competitive Proposals for Defense Contracts.” IPOA fully supports the IMPROVE Act’s goal of more efficiently procuring services to support the Department of Defense. However, the amendment would effectively hamstring the ability of contracting officers to use discretion in awarding contracts and sets the stage for compulsory acceptance of the cheapest offer, minimizing other factors such as experience, quality or past performance.
“Lowest-price security not good enough for war-zone embassies”
IPOA cited an October 1, 2009 report from the Commission on Wartime Contracting entitled “Lowest-price security not good enough for war-zone embassies,” in which the Commission noted the dangers of focusing on price as the determinative factor when selecting contractors for the Department of State. The Commission noted that statutory requirements to select the lowest price can do more harm than good. In fact, the Commission recommended that the provision be eliminated and that the Department of State be given the flexibility to use a best value award process. The House amendment currently under consideration would move the Department of Defense closer to a statutory “low price” award scheme and would go against the clear recommendation of the Commission.
“Forcing the government to contract essential services on the cheap is not a recipe for success,” said Doug Brooks, IPOA President, “if we’ve learned anything over the past nine years it is that cutting corners on oversight or quality in contracting can have dire consequences.” Brooks noted that IPOA supports the concept of “best value” in federal procurements and believes the amendment’s “one size fits all” approach is ill advised.
Brooks further noted that IPOA believes it is unwise to require cost to be considered the ultimate driver in federal procurement, for doing so simply creates a “race to the bottom” where other qualifications are not given due consideration. “We believe that the proposed amendment will result in more contract defaults, poor performance and an overall decrease in the quality of goods and services provided to the services.”
IPOA was founded in 2001 to reflect a clear recognition that the private sector can play a larger, more cost-effective role in fundamentally improving peace and stability operations worldwide. With more than 60 members, IPOA is the leading voice of the stability operations industry.
Story here.
——————————————————————
CWC Findings on Embassy Guards Fiasco Amount to “Blame Shifting”
Oct 06, 2009
On October 1st, the Commission on War Time Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan (CWC) issued a Special Report. Entitled “Lowest-priced security not good enough for war-zone embassies,” the report places most of the blame for the recent fiasco involving the work of ArmorGroup North America at the U.S. embassy in Kabul, Afghanistan, on the use of a negotiated procurement source selection technique known as “lowest-price technically acceptable offer” (LPTAO).
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
Maritime Security: U.S. Helps African Navies With Floating Academy
I wanted to put this up, because they gave a mention to MPRI training the Equatorial Guinea navy. I posted the job ad for this gig awhile back, and it is cool to hear a little something about it. Although the hardhat Stetsons decorated with the ‘stars and stripes’ is a little much for me. lol Check it out. –Matt
——————————————————————
U.S. helps African navies with floating academy
Tue, Apr 20 2010
By David Lewis
ABOARD USS GUNSTON HALL (Reuters) – Men in blue overalls haul on the ropes alongside American crewmen sporting hardhats shaped as Stetsons and decorated in the stars and stripes.
“Pull harder! Coil the ropes!” one of the Americans barks at the “ship riders,” a term used for the West African sailors aboard the U.S. amphibious landing vessel as she slips her moorings in the port of Dakar.
This is a floating academy, part of an effort by the U.S. military to train local navies and coast guards to combat rising instability in the Gulf of Guinea — an increasingly important source of oil and other raw materials for western markets which has drawn huge international investment.
The United States says the destabilizing effects of piracy, drug smuggling, and illegal fishing in the area are also costing West and Central African coastal economies billions of dollars each year in lost revenues.
“You have an area that is traditionally a landward-focused region which is awakening to the impact of the maritime domain,” said Captain Cindy Thebaud, commander of the U.S. Navy’s Destroyer Squadron Six Zero and head of the project.
Illinois: Crime In Chicago Increases, Lawmakers Call For The National Guard
Chicago is in a state of emergency. It has been reported that 113 people have been killed in Chicago this year. The same number of U.S. soldiers have been killed in Iraq and Afghanistan during the same time period. –Huffington Post, Rev. Jesse Jackson
*****
Man, Chicago has always been bad, but when it gets to the point where folks are asking for some cavalry to come in and put a check on this stuff, I take notice. This is also a political move to bring more attention to the problem, and it seems to be the latest tactic with lawmakers and governors in a few other states in the US. But the numbers speak for themselves in this case, as the quote up top has clearly identified. –Matt
———————————————————–
Chicago Lawmakers: Call In the National Guard
April 26, 2010
Two lawmakers who believe violence has become so rampant in Chicago that the Illinois National Guard must be called in to help made a public plea to Gov. Pat Quinn to deploy troops.
CHICAGO — Two lawmakers who believe violence has become so rampant in Chicago that the Illinois National Guard must be called in to help made a public plea to Gov. Pat Quinn on Sunday to deploy troops.
A recent surge in violent crime, including a night last week that saw seven people killed and 18 wounded — mostly by gunfire — prompted the request from Chicago Democratic Reps. John Fritchey and LaShawn Ford. They were joined by Willie Williams, whose son was shot and killed in 2006.
Chicago has had 113 homicide victims so far this year, Fritchey said.
“As we speak, National Guard members are working side-by-side with our troops to fight a war halfway around the world,” he said during a news conference in downtown Chicago. “The unfortunate reality is that we have another war that is just as deadly that is taking place right in our backyard.”
Law Enforcement: Broken Window Theory, By George L. Kelling
Consider a building with a few broken windows. If the windows are not repaired, the tendency is for vandals to break a few more windows. Eventually, they may even break into the building, and if it’s unoccupied, perhaps become squatters or light fires inside.
Or consider a sidewalk. Some litter accumulates. Soon, more litter accumulates. Eventually, people even start leaving bags of trash from take-out restaurants there or breaking into cars.
A successful strategy for preventing vandalism, say the book’s authors, is to fix the problems when they are small. Repair the broken windows within a short time, say, a day or a week, and the tendency is that vandals are much less likely to break more windows or do further damage. Clean up the sidewalk every day, and the tendency is for litter not to accumulate (or for the rate of littering to be much less). Problems do not escalate and thus respectable residents do not flee a neighborhood.
The theory thus makes two major claims: that further petty crime and low-level anti-social behavior will be deterred, and that major crime will, as a result, be prevented. Criticism of the theory has tended to focus only on the latter claim.
****
If you ever hear the whole ‘broken windows theory‘ being thrown around in discussions about law enforcement and reducing crime, this is the origins of the idea. George Kelling wrote this article below, and also has a book that further expands upon the ideas called Fixing Broken Windows: Restoring Order and Reducing Crime in Our Communities. So I wanted to put this out there for the readership, because I believe that parts of this theory, if not the general idea of it, could definitely be applied to our industry.
A really basic way to apply this theory to our industry, is the management of your person and your position/post at whatever contract you are at. Will others have less respect for your post and your job, if they see that your post or even you is in complete disarray(broken window)? First impressions make lasting impressions, and if your post or you looks sloppy or looks unorganized, then will others feel more inclined to disrespect your post or ‘break another window’? It is an interesting idea that I often come back to when I think about the defense or crime.
Take it a step further. If a town or city in a war zone, was organized and sharp looking, complete with defenses that actually look impressive, will an enemy or even bandits be less inclined to attack it? If a ‘jundi’ in Iraq is manning a position at a site, and the sand bags are all leaking out and the gun is covered in rust and dirt, and trash is all over the post, would insurgents be more inclined to pick that post to focus a coordinated assault with? (you could also use this to your advantage for a ‘counter’ strategy–hidden surprises anyone?)
How about for minimizing crime in war zones? Obviously law enforcement is weakened in war zones, because these officers are busy with a lot of stuff. (like not getting killed). If there is not an effort to clean up the bullet holes, or fix the windows, or repair the homes that are damaged by war, will criminals naturally feel like they can get away with anything? That no one in the community cares about their community, and that they could easily be manipulated by criminals imposing their will? Interesting stuff, and I would like to hear what you think about Broken Window Theory, as it applies to CONUS or OCONUS? –Matt
————————————————————–
March 1982
The police and neighborhood safety
By George L. Kelling
In the mid-l970s The State of New Jersey announced a “Safe and Clean Neighborhoods Program,” designed to improve the quality of community life in twenty-eight cities. As part of that program, the state provided money to help cities take police officers out of their patrol cars and assign them to walking beats. The governor and other state officials were enthusiastic about using foot patrol as a way of cutting crime, but many police chiefs were skeptical. Foot patrol, in their eyes, had been pretty much discredited. It reduced the mobility of the police, who thus had difficulty responding to citizen calls for service, and it weakened headquarters control over patrol officers.
Many police officers also disliked foot patrol, but for different reasons: it was hard work, it kept them outside on cold, rainy nights, and it reduced their chances for making a “good pinch.” In some departments, assigning officers to foot patrol had been used as a form of punishment. And academic experts on policing doubted that foot patrol would have any impact on crime rates; it was, in the opinion of most, little more than a sop to public opinion. But since the state was paying for it, the local authorities were willing to go along.