PRIVATE-PUBLIC COMPETITIONS IN THE FISCAL YEAR 2015 BUDGET
by
Sean Patton
A capstone project submitted to Johns Hopkins University in conformity with the
requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Public Management
Baltimore, Maryland
May, 2014
© 2014 Sean Patton
All Rights Reserved
Contents
Action-Forcing Event ..................................................................................................................................... 1
Statement of the Problem ............................................................................................................................ 1
History ........................................................................................................................................................... 4
The Civilian Workforce .............................................................................................................................. 4
Rise in Contractor Spending...................................................................................................................... 7
Private-Public Competitions ................................................................................................................... 11
Background ................................................................................................................................................. 13
The Facts ................................................................................................................................................. 13
The Players .............................................................................................................................................. 18
Policy Proposal ............................................................................................................................................ 21
Policy Authorization ................................................................................................................................ 22
Policy Implementation ............................................................................................................................ 23
Policy Analysis ............................................................................................................................................. 26
Political Analysis .......................................................................................................................................... 34
Recommendation........................................................................................................................................ 40
ii
Memorandum to: Acting Administrator Lesley Field, Office of Federal Procurement Policy
(OFPP)
Subject: Private-Public Competitions in the FY15 Budget
Date: February 4th, 2014
Action-Forcing Event
On January 15th, Congress passed the omnibus spending bill for Fiscal Year 2014. The
President’s 2015 budget transmission to Congress will be delayed until March so that the
Administration can adjust the blueprint to fit into the spending levels approved by both
chambers in the bipartisan spending agreement from December 2013. 1 For the seventh year in
a row, Congress has included language that prohibits the use of appropriated funds to conduct
private-public competitions for the purpose of contracting out commercial government
functions. 2 With Democratic control of the Senate after upcoming election uncertain, the
Administration’s ability to influence appropriations bills after this year may become more
limited.
Statement of the Problem
Flat or diminishing budgets for most federal agencies are creating funding problems for
key government services. 3 Although the December budget agreement solved the immediate
problem of avoiding a potential shutdown and lessening the impact of sequestration in 2014
and likely in 2015, it contained few initiatives to make the government more lean and cost
efficient.
1
Epstein, Reid J. “President Obama to release 2015 Budget March 4.” Politico, January 23, 2014. Accessed
th
January 27 2014. http://www.politico.com/story/2014/01/2015-budget-release-date-102517.html.
2
H. R. 3547. Pg.64 although cited multiple times throughout the Bill, one example is under the General
Provisions for the Department of Justice Sec.211. Found here: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS113hr3547enr/pdf/BILLS-113hr3547enr.pdf.
3
Stein, Harry, “How Sequestration Gets Worse in 2014,” Center for American Progress. 2013 Accessed
th
February 9 , 2014. http://www.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/sequestration-getsworse-rev.pdf.
1
The federal government’s civilian workforce has grown by 14% in the past 12 years. This
increase is largely due to the creation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), increased
demands from the Department of Defense (DOD) due to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and
the need for DOD to stand-up a capable cybersecurity workforce. 4 In other words, this increase
in workforce size has been driven by a real increase in requirements for government services.
Simultaneously, the average civilian employee now requires more advanced and technical skills
necessitating a workforce with greater education, and therefore greater pay. 5
This slow but steady shift to a more expensive workforce has sparked interest in
Congress to reform federal pay and compensation, arguing public sector pay is overly generous
when compared with comparable private-sector positions. Studies by the Congressional
Research Service (CRS) and various think tanks have had mix results regarding this issue. 6
Although it would help reduce discretionary budgets, reforming federal pay would simply solve
one problem by replacing it with another. Cutting the current compensation and benefits
package will make attracting and retaining the types of individuals required for today’s federal
workforce more difficult. This could have significant consequences; in its 2013 high-risk report,
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) identified an incoming wave of retirement-eligible
federal employees that could create critical skills gaps throughout the government. 7
A long standing strategy for creating efficiencies in government has been the use of
contractors. In order to accomplish agency missions of ever-increasing complexity, the
government relies on a large contractor workforce to provide critical services. It is estimated
4
Government Accountability Office. Recent Trends in Federal Civilian Employment and Compensation,
th
GAO-14-215. 2014, 9. Accessed February 9 , 2014. http://gao.gov/assets/670/660449.pdf.
5
Ibid
6
Congressional Research Service. Comparing Compensation for Federal and Private-Sector Workers: An
th
Overview, By David H. Bradley. R42636. 2012. Pg. 17. Accessed on February 9 , 2014.
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42636.pdf
7
Government Accountability Office “High Risk: Strategic Human Capital Management” Accessed on
th
February 9 , 2014: http://www.gao.gov/highrisk/strategic_human_management/why_did_study#t=1.
2
that today more than one in every six dollars the government spends goes to contractors. 8
While the results are mixed depending on industry, major government contractors have actually
been able to maintain or even increase their profits despite the budget pressures of recent
years.9 There is also a growing body of research indicating that the rapid growth in contracting
has led to significantly higher government spending, paying billions more to support contractors
than it would for a comparable federal workforce. 10 These studies put a fair share of the blame
on the government for not obtaining competitive, market-based contracts and maintaining
effective oversight on contract costs. 11 This non-competitive environment has created an
inequity, both between the government and the contractor as well as other potential private
sector solutions. 12
The continued prohibition of private-public competitions throughout the government
exacerbates the problems above as it removes a tool for agencies to evaluate whether work
performed in-house could be accomplished with contractors. Meanwhile, major contractors are
reaping increased profits as budgets are shrinking, with little incentive to perform the work in a
more economic and efficient manner. This lack of competition on both sides creates a
monopolistic type environment, and “it is the presence of competition (or even the clear
8
th
Office of Federal Procurement Policy Homepage. Accessed on February 9 , 2014:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/procurement_default.
9
Eric Katz, “Most Top Contractors Increased Business with the Federal Government in 2012”, Government
th
th
Executive, May 8 2012. Accessed on February 9 , 2014:
http://www.govexec.com/contracting/2013/05/most-top-contractors-increased-business-federalgovernment-2012/63049/.
10
Chasey, Paul & Amey, Scott “Bad Business: Billions of Taxpayer Dollars Wasted on Hiring Contractors.”
th
Project on Government Oversight. September 13 , 2011: 1.
11
Ibid
12
Government Accountability Office, Opportunities Exist to Increase Competition and Assess Reasons
th
When Only One Offer is Received, GAO-10-833. 2010, 49. Accessed on February 10 , 2014:
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d10833.pdf.
3
potential for it) that forces the performer to innovate for higher performance at lower cost.” 13
Unfortunately, the process for carrying out private-public competitions even before the current
moratorium was problematic in itself, with multiple reports of unsatisfactory contractor
performance or dubious competitive studies performed by agencies. 14
Although the major drivers to the deficit are found in mandatory programs, a growing,
more expensive federal workforce will drain agency’s already dwindling discretionary budgets
when compensation as a share of overall spending increases. Meanwhile, increased spending
for contractors that do not bring demonstrable efficiencies to the government only adds to
wasteful spending. A lack of competition for commercial government functions and inability to
effectively evaluate the performance of contractors carrying out such functions will continue to
strain agency budgets as the federal workforce becomes more expensive.
History
The Civilian Workforce
The size and cost of the federal workforce is ever shifting and dependent on various
conditions such as Administration goals, national security or war requirements, and technology.
Accounting for the true size of workforce is an ongoing challenge. With multiple populations
paid by federal funds, scholars note that one should include military personnel, Federal civil
servants, contractors, grantee positions and even post office employees when considering the
size of government. All together this makes for a group of over 12 million people, though there
is no official accounting of contract employees. 15 Civil servants make up approximately 2 million
13
Gansler, Jaques S.“Moving Toward Market-Based Government: The Changing Role of Government as
th
the Provider” IBM Center for The Business of Government. 11. Accessed on February 10 , 2014:
http://www.businessofgovernment.org/sites/default/files/MarketBasedGovernment.pdf.
14
Government Accountability Office, “Improving the Sourcing Decisions of the Government: Final
Report”, Commercial Activities Panel. April, 2002. 40.
15
Light, Paul C, “Fact Sheet On The New True Size of Government”, The Brookings Institution: Center for
Public Service. 2003. 5. Accessed on February 22, 2014:
4
of this population, and are found mostly in the executive branch. It is this group that has
recently been targeted by Congress for pay reform as a way to generate savings and reduce
budget deficits.
The number of civilian employees peaked in 1969, a time that coincided with the height
of the Vietnam War, the space race, and prior to the automation of many clerical duties brought
by personal computing. 16 The civilian workforce stayed above two million until 1996 and
eventually reached its lowest headcount since before World War II in 2000. This year had
followed a period of relative economic stability and no major foreign conflicts; it was also one of
the few years in recent history that the U.S. ran a budget surplus. During this period,
approximately 275,000 federal jobs were cut or privatized. This lean stage was short lived
however, when the attacks of September 11th, 2001 forced the nation to prioritize and invest
billions into homeland security, as well as wage two major wars abroad. Since then, the civilian
workforce has steadily increased, and once again crossed the two million mark during the
Obama administration. These swings in headcount are important to understand, as they
illustrate how reactionary the size of the Federal workforce is to external factors
The compensation, benefits and retirement system of executive branch employees has
been relatively stable since the late 1980s. Originally in a pure defined-benefit pension
program, Federal employees stayed outside of Social Security until P.L. 98-21 was passed in
1983 and required any new Federal employees to join. The existing pension system, the Civil
Service Retirement System (CSRS), was not compatible with Social security, and would have
http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/research/files/articles/2003/9/05politics%20light/light20030905.pdf
.
16
“OPM Data Historical Tables.” Accessed on February 22, 2014: https://www.opm.gov/policy-dataoversight/data-analysis-documentation/federal-employment-reports/historical-tables/executive-branchcivilian-employment-since-1940/.
5
resulted in a significant duplication of benefits at a high cost to employees. 17 Therefore, the
current Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS) was developed. FERS is meant to provide
economic security and income during retirement using three elements, the FERS retirement
annuity, a 401(k)-like system called the Thrift-Savings Program (TSP), and Social Security
benefits. Although the new system avoided a duplication of benefits, it effectively reduced the
pension guarantee for all new workers.
As a result of recent budget agreements, new Federal employees have been required to
contribute higher percentages to their pension benefits than current employees, who contribute
at a rate of .08% of their annual pay. To offset extended unemployment benefits and the
payroll tax cut as part of the February 2012 budget deal, new employees joining the government
after 2012 have to contribute an additional 2.3%. This was followed a year later by the
Bipartisan Budget Agreement, which required those joining the government after 2013 to
contribute an additional 3.2% above the going 0.8% rate.
Finally, the demographics of the Federal workforce have changed over the years. The
growth since 2001 has mostly been focused on administrative and professional occupations
types, which require higher education and therefore higher pay. See Figure 1 for the growth of
these different groups in the last 12 years. While these groups have steadily increased, those
with high school degrees or incomplete college experience have remained steady. Civilian
employees are also getting simultaneously older and younger, with a smaller percentage of
17
Congressional Research Service. Federal Employees’ Retirement System: Benefits and Financing, By
th
Katelin P. Isaacs. 98-810. 2014. 1. Accessed on February 23 , 2014. http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/98810.pdf.
6
Figure 1:
workers in their late 30s to 40s. 18 GAO has marked this issue of human capital management as
high risk, since 31% of current federal employees will be eligible to retire in 2017.
Rise in Contractor Spending
The use of contractors steadily increased over the last half of the 20th century, but most
notably since the 1980s. It was Reagan who famously said when he took office: “In this present
crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.” 19 The crisis
he was referring to was the economic downturn and stagflation that crippled the country in the
late 1970s. Reagan’s administration took several steps to outsource functions being carried out
18
Congressional Research Service. The Federal Workforce: Characteristics and Trends, By Curtis W.
th
Copeland. RL34865. April, 2011. 18. Accessed on February 23 , 2014.
http://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/RL34685_20110419.pdf
19
th
rd
Ronald Regan’s First Inaugural Address, January 20 , 1981. Accessed February 23 , 2014.
https://www.reaganfoundation.org/pdf/Inaugural_Address_012081.pdf.
7
by Federal employees, particularly during his second term when deficits were ballooning and
expenditures stubbornly rising. 20 One step was the creation of the Commercial Activities
Program, which set to more effectively implement the existing, yet relatively unused, OMB
Circular A-76 program for competing and privatizing government services. 21 Reliable data on
contractor spending before the 1990s is sparse, but during it is safe to assume that contractor
spending increased during Reagan’s two terms.
The Clinton Administration was also a proponent of smaller, leaner government. One of
its first initiatives, spearheaded by then-Vice President Al Gore, was The National Partnership for
Reinventing Government (Reinventing Government) created in March of 1993. 22 This initiative
brought numerous reforms to government operations, such as the Government Performance
and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA). As the title of the act suggests, this law attempted to improve
government project management by focusing for the first time on integrating results and agency
specific performance measures into the budget process. 23 The Reinventing Government
initiative also recommended cutting 252,000 government positions that were deemed
unnecessary. 24 Although 400,000 contracting positions were also eliminated during this period,
these reductions were not solely resulted from Clinton Administration initiatives to streamline
the government. These reductions were largely attributed to the “peace dividend” resulting
from the end of The Cold War. 25 The dramatic decrease in defense spending from the 1980s
20
Michal Laurie Tingle, “Privatization and the Reagan Administration: Ideology and Application,” Yale Law
& Policy Review, Vol. 6, No. 1 (1988): 230.
21
Ibid, 234.
22
John Kamensky, “A Brief History”, National Partnership for Reinventing Government. Accessed on
rd
February 23 , 2014. http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/npr/whoweare/history2.html.
23
rd
What is GPRA” Accessed on February 23 , 2014. http://www.foreffectivegov.org/node/326
24
John Kamensky, “A Brief History”, National Partnership for Reinventing Government. Accessed on
rd
February 23 , 2014. http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/npr/whoweare/history2.html.
25
Light, Paul C, “Fact Sheet On The New True Size of Government”, The Brookings Institution: Center for
Public Service. 2003. 5. Accessed on February 22, 2014:
8
accounted for a significant amount of the government and contractor spending reductions
during this period.
Contracting of government services increased significantly in the Administration of
George W. Bush. The number of contractors exploded from 2002 to 2005, increasing by about
2.5 million, almost 50%. Similar to the concurrent increase in the size of the federal workforce,
this rapid growth in the number of contractors was largely the result of new homeland security
and war requirements. One major development and point of controversy during this period was
the use of contractors to conduct base and escort security in a warzone. 26 Several reports
questioned the use of contractors in these environments, and particularly whether or not the
administration maintained sufficient oversight to monitor the massive and rapid increase in
procurement spending in general. 27 In 2007, the Committee on Oversight & Government
Reform as well as several media outlets referred to the contractor workforce as a “shadow
government”, masking the true size and cost of federal operations. 28
It has been a goal of the current Administration to halt the steady growth in contractor
spending and maintain better oversight of contract awards and potentially wasteful spending.
This initiative has been met with success, in part due to the end of U.S. involvement in Iraq and
the war in Afghanistan winding down. 2010 saw the first decrease in government contracting in
http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/research/files/articles/2003/9/05politics%20light/light20030905.pdf
.
26
Commission on War Time Contracting: Final Report. P.2 Accessed on February 23, 2014.
http://cybercemetery.unt.edu/archive/cwc/20110929214151/http://www.wartimecontracting.gov/docs/
CWC_FinalReport-Cover-ExecSum.pdf
27
Committee On Government Reform-Minority Staff, “Dollars, Not Sense, Government Contracting Under
rd
the Bush Administration” June, 2006. Accessed on February 23 , 2014: http://oversightarchive.waxman.house.gov/documents/20061211100757-98364.pdf.
28
Scott Shane and Ron Nixon, “U.S. Contractors Becoming a Fourth Branch of Government”, The New York
th
rd
Times, February 4 , 2007. Accessed on February 23 2014:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/04/world/americas/04ihtweb.0204contract.4460796.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0.
9
Figure 2:
Source: OMB, 2013
13 years, and Figure 2 illustrates the modest reduction in contractor spending seen since
then. Another first term initiative was to create awareness and transparency into spending on
government contracting. With the benefit of modern data collection and analysis, a website has
been created that is open to the public and easily view government expenditures by state,
including breakouts in contracting or grants spending. In 2011, OMB published guidelines in an
attempt to clarify the definition of what work is falls under the definition of “inherently
governmental” as well as provide guidance on how to handle work that is “closely associated”
with inherently governmental functions. 29 This was an important step in addressing some of the
29
Office of Management and Budget, “Performance of Inherently Governmental and Critical Functions”,
rd
The Federal Register, Vol. 76, No. 176 (2011), Accessed on February 23 , 2014:
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011-09-12/pdf/2011-23165.pdf.
10
concerns held by Congress and the current administration on the contracting practices of the
previous administration.
Private-Public Competitions
Circular A-76 originated as a policy statement of the Eisenhower administration in 1966,
it formally established the government’s intention to use the private sector to perform
commercial activities required for government operations. 30 The Circular has been revised
several times over the past fifty years, with a handbook being published in 1979, significant
revisions following the Clinton Administration’s initiative of Reinventing Government in the
1990s and extensive changes as a result of George W. Bush’s focus on contacting out
government services during his first term. Studies have indicated though that overall, A-76 cost
comparisons have not been regularly used except during these periods of revision, indicating
that increases in A-76 studies are largely related to changes in administration and resulting new
priorities. 31
In the time leading up to the 1996 revision, the majority of A-76 competitions took place
solely within the Department of Defense (DOD). 32 But even for DOD, which a vast contracting
network for hundreds of different types of activities, A-76 competitions make up a small
percentage of total contracted services. 33 However, these competitions in the past have been
recognized for providing significant savings. For example, in 2000, DOD reported that 286
separate A-76 competitions led to $290 million in savings in fiscal 1999. 34 Most other agencies
up into the 1990s either ignored the guidance as a matter of internal policy or else contracted
30
Congressional Research Service. Circular A-76 Revision 2003: Selected Issues, by L. Elaine Halchin,
th
RL32017, January 7 2005, 1.
31
Commercial Activities Panel “Improving the Sourcing Decisions of the Government: Final Report”, GAO,
April, 2002. 20.
32
Congressional Budget Office. Contracting Out: Potential for Reducing Federal Costs, 1987, 7.
33
Ibid. 22.
34
Government Accountability Office. DOD Competitive Sourcing: Results of A-76 Studies Over the Past 5
years. 2000. 4.
11
out in-house services without doing any kind of cost comparison in order to meet agency
goals. 35 The Clinton Administrations sought to succeed where Reagan had failed and revised the
Circular as well as updated its accompanying handbook to aid in the complex comparison
process as a way of making A-76 more widely ingrained as standard government policy.
George W. Bush’s A-76 revision in 2003 vastly increased the number of competitive
studies taking place in the government. These changes followed some, but not many, of the
recommendations of the Commercial Activities Panel (CAP), a group of experts organized by
GAO who met in 2001 and 2002 to analyze the issues surrounding A-76 as well as general
federal outsourcing decisions. The 2003 revision and the policies that accompanied it quickly
came under attack as overly aggressive, with critics saying it created an environment that
coerced agencies to contract out services and removed some key protections for government
employees. For example, an OMB directive in 2001 required agencies to compete or convert “a
minimum of 5% of their full time equivalents (FTEs) listed on their FAIR inventories (the groups
subject to competition) by the end of 2002 and compete or convert an additional 10% by the
end of 2003. The combined goal of 15% equated to 127,500 FTEs.” 36 Although OMB moved
away from these kinds of quotas, they continued to push agencies to increase their use of A-76
competitions. Of the many revisions made in 2003, the most notable change was the shift in
language from the initial tone of the 1966 guidance, from contracting commercial services as a
general policy of the federal government, to actively subjecting commercial services performed
35
Government Accountability Office. NASA Not Complying with OMB Circular A-76. 1985. 3.
Congressional Research Service. Circular A-76 Revision 2003: Selected Issues. L. Elaine Halchin, RL32017,
th
January 7 2005, 3.
36
12
by the government to regular competition. 37 As a result, OMB reported in 2008 that the studies
conducted from 2003 through 2007 would eventually lead to $7.2 billion in savings. 38
In 2007 a Washington Post investigation brought to light unsanitary conditions and poor
medical treatment being provided to returning veterans at Walter Reed Hospital in Washington
DC. This created controversy as the medical center support contract had been recently
privatized through a lengthy A-76 competition. 39 A series of hearings and investigations took
place surrounding the Army’s management of support services contracts, as well as issues with
A-76. In the end, several senior Army officials resigned and Congress passed legislation to
prohibit the conduct of A-76 competitions at military medical facilities, a suspension that
eventually spread to all public-private competitions throughout the Federal Government.
Dueling opinions took shape though as to whether the failures at Walter Reed were a result of
“unaccountable private contractors” or the medical centers “poor management capability,”
meaning the Army was ultimately to blame, not the contractors. 40 The moratorium persists to
this day, and there has been little movement in the past year to lift it.
Background
The Facts
There are several proposals being floated in Congress to reform federal pay or
otherwise shrink the Federal workforce. In 2010, and with some resurgence in 2013, the
Simpson-Bowles deficit reduction plan called for a number of tweaks to the current retirement
system. These included a chained-CPI for inflation calculations, a broader average for
37
Ibid. 5.
rd
Report on Competitive Sourcing Results, Accessed February 23 , 2014:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/procurement/reports/comp_sourc_fy2007.pdf
39
Congressional Research Service. Walter Reed Army Medical Center (WRAMC) and Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-76: Implications for the Future. RL34140; August 21, 2007
Pg.1,2
40
Ibid. 4.
38
13
calculating pension annuity, as well as maintaining the federal pay freeze and shrinking the
workforce by 10% through attrition. 41 The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has published
analyses on this subject, and estimates that a 10% reduction would eliminate about $43 billion
in necessary budget authority over ten years:
However, the Federal workforce has already been shrinking; retirement rates have increased by
30% since 2010 and according to GAO resignations are also on the rise. 42 The Bureau of Labor
Statistics (BLS) projects that the size of the federal workforce will shrink by 13% over the next
eight years without the direction of any formal policy change. 43
There is growing evidence that the contractor workforce is beginning to feel the pinch
from four years of increased budget austerity. According to preliminary reports from OMB and
GAO, contractor spending was reduced by $58 billion in Fiscal Year 2013, but the cause of this
drop is contended. 44 The OFPP has taken the stance that this has been the result of smarter
buying by agencies, while others maintain that the reduction is merely deferred expenditures
41
Moment of Truth Project, A Bipartisan Path Forward to Securing America’s Future, April, 2013 Accessed
on 3/2/2014:
http://www.momentoftruthproject.org/sites/default/files/Full%20Plan%20of%20Securing%20America%2
7s%20Future.pdf. “Chained CPI” is a term that refers to a less generous formula for determining the
consumer price index, a measure for determining inflation of benefits for retirees.
42
Recent Trends in Federal Civilian Employment and Compensation, 17.
43
nd
“Employment by Major Industry Sector, 2002, 2012, and Projected 2022”, Accessed on March 2 , 2014
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecopro.t03.htm.
44
Andy Medici, “Sequestration Cuts Contract Spending by $58 Billion in 2013”, Federal Times, January 15,
nd
2014, Accessed on March 2 , 2014:
http://www.federaltimes.com/article/20140115/ACQ02/301150007/Sequestration-cuts-contractspending-58-billion-2013.
14
due to sequestration. 45 Although the answer is likely a bit of both, this reduction indicates
contractors are not fully immune to changes in the federal budget. However, the pain seems to
not be shared equally among large companies and small ones. In 2013, Lockheed Martin
actually saw an increase in awards of 22%, while small businesses collectively shrank by about
8%. 46 Tracking contracting expenditures remains stubbornly difficult, due to the regular practice
of large firms subcontracting to various small businesses creating a complex web of relationships
between the government and private sector.
During the first term, the Obama Administration was a proponent of “in-sourcing”, or
bringing jobs back to the government that were previously contracted out. This is apparent in
the growth of the Federal workforce over the last three years, however there have been
indications that both Congress and the White House is wavering in this stance. 47 Along with the
multiple House amendments targeting the practice, the government itself has halted or slowed
in-sourcing plans, citing a lack of savings and the process being quota driven, similar to the same
shortfalls seen in the aggressive privatization that took place after the 2003 revision to A-76. 48
Since 2007, annual appropriations have forbidden private-public competitions.
Amendments, primarily from the Republican side of the House, have been brought forward to
reverse the policy and there is a modest lobbying effort from business organizations and major
45
th
Stein, Harry, “How Sequestration Gets Worse in 2014,” 6. Accessed March 13 , 2014.
http://www.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/sequestration-gets-worse-rev.pdf.
46
Danielle Ivory, “Federal contracts Plunge, Squeezing Private Companies”, The New York Times, January
th
nd
15 , 2014, Accessed on March 2 , 2014: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/16/business/federalcontracts-plunge-squeezing-private-companies.html?_r=0.
47
Charles S. Clark, “Efforts to Bring Jobs In-house May Be Losing Momentum”, Government Executive,
nd
May 31, 2011, Accessed on March 2 , 2014: http://www.govexec.com/oversight/2011/05/efforts-tobring-jobs-in-house-may-be-losing-momentum/34066/.
48
Robert Brodsky, “Industry Officials Criticize ‘Quota-Driven Defense In-sourcing” Government Executive,
th
nd
May 4 , 2010, Accessed on March 2 , 2014: http://www.govexec.com/defense/2010/05/industryofficials-criticize-quota-driven-defense-insourcing/31444/.
15
government contractors to end the moratorium, particularly for DOD. 49 Such amendments
have been raised each year, but are eventually voted down at some point before reaching the
president for signature. Interestingly, in 2013 the amendment to repeal the moratorium was
voted down before it even left the house, with 55 Republicans voting against the measure. 50
Without a mechanism to compare private/public costs, spending on service contracts has rapidly
outpaced any growth in spending on Federal employees in the past decade. 51
The process for how to successfully carry out a competition has been criticized as
inconsistent and complicated in practice, but the basic steps for conducting these studies are
relatively simple. As the guidance instructs, agencies are required to inventory all activities they
conduct on an annual basis and classify them as commercial or inherently governmental. These
inventories are then reviewed by OMB and made available to Congress and the public. 52
Activities in the commercial category are then available for competition. The competition itself
involves six key steps:
“
1. Develop a Performance Work Statement (PWS);
2. Developing a Government Management Plan to determine the government’s “most
efficient
organization” (MEO);
3. Developing an in-house government cost estimate for the in-house plan;
4. Issuing a solicitation for private-sector offers (under the FAR provisions that apply to
federal procurements in general;
49
nd
Business Coalition for Fair Competition website, “About BCFC”, Accessed on March 2 2014,
http://www.governmentcompetition.org/About_BCFC.html.
50
th
nd
Federal Daily “House Votes Down Outsourcing Measure”, June 17 , 2013. Accessed on March 2 ,
2014:
http://federaldaily.com/articles/2013/06/17/house-votes-down-outsourcing-measure.aspx.
51
Letter to OMB: “Feds Vs. Contractors: Federal Employees Often Save Money, But an Advisory Panel is
Needed to Create Cost Comparison Model” from Project on Government Oversight (POGO) April, 2013.
http://www.pogo.org/our-work/letters/2013/20130415-feds-vs-contractors-cost-comparison.html#fn14.
52
U.S. Office of Management and Budget. Circular A-76 inc. Technical Correction. Revised 2003. Section A
Paragraphs 1&2.
16
5. Selecting the best private sector offer and comparing it with the in-house estimate,
then
selecting the lower cost alternative; and
6. Addressing any appeals submitted under the administrative appeals process, which is
designed to ensure that all costs are fair, accurate and calculated in the manner
prescribed by
the A-76 handbook.” 53
After this process is completed, which can span several months and sometimes years, a decision
is made and a contract is either awarded or the activity remains in-house. There are various
checks on cost and performance accountability regardless which sector carries out the task, but
these checks were the subject of scrutiny in the 2002 analysis of the A-76 process. 54
When discussing private/public competitions and how agencies used the A-76 process,
the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and its role in government procurement must be
understood. The FAR is a regulation that governs the acquisition of goods and services for most
agencies and has been in effect since 1984. As exemplified by A-76 though, “it is not the only
authority governing acquisitions of goods and services by executive branch agencies” and some
agencies or purchases are exempt from the FAR. 55 It is however the primary rulebook for
federal contracting officers and has generally been less open to interpretation and therefore
appeals and legal issues than private/public competitions. 56 But, the FAR leaves out some
aspects that A-76 includes, such as a methodology for calculating public sector costs. Also, the
FAR is based on a “best-value” approach rather than a simple lowest cost determination which
opens the door to more interpretation of contract bids and conflicts of interest or possibly
corruption.
53
Commercial Activities Panel “Improving the Sourcing Decisions of the Government: Final Report,” 16.
Ibid, 20.
55
Congressional Research Service. The Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR): Answers to Frequently Asked
th
Questions. R42826. November 16 , 2012. 2.
56
Commercial Activities Panel. 49.
54
17
The Players
Association of Federal Government Employees (AFGE): Historically, AFGE has been opposed to
A-76 and private/public competitions as they threaten the security of Federal jobs. On their
website, AFGE provides talking points on their stance against A-76, stating that the attempted
repeals of the moratorium are part of Republican’s “all-out assault on federal employees.” 57 It
should be noted though that although AFGE is opposed to these competitions, they appear even
more opposed to the transition to a more FAR-based approach that was supported in the CAP
study in 2002. In the appendix of the study, then-President of the organization Bobby Harnage
Sr. stated that “In recommending the replacement of A-76 with the FAR, the pro-contractor
faction of the panel took a position that was rejected even by the “acquisition reform”-minded
Clinton Administration.” 58 The current President, David Cox, maintains this stance and
promotes continued lobbying against any form of private/public competitions.
Government Contractors: Any policy change that involves the availability of government
contracts will be closely monitored by the private sector. Several private sector associations
have petitioned congress to vote to repeal the moratorium on private/public competitions. 59
For example, in 2011 the Professional Services Council, a trade association for government
contractors, wrote to Representative Eric Cantor stating: “Prior restrictions on the use of A-76
have both eliminated the competition tool—which is widely recognized to be the most effective
means of generating higher performance and greater efficiency—and significantly restricted the
ability of businesses, including small businesses, to compete for work and offer savings to the
57
nd
AFGE Website: “Material for Lobbying Senators on A-76 Safeguards” Accessed on March 2 , 2014:
https://www.afge.org/index.cfm?page=Privatization&Fuse=Content&ContentID=2605
58
Commercial Activities Panel. 64.
59
nd
Business Coalition for Fair Competition to Harold Rogers, June 22, 2011. Accessed on March 2 , 2014:
http://www.governmentcompetition.org/uploads/Coalition_Letter_Chairman_Hal_Rogers-6-22-11.pdf
18
federal government.” 60 Despite earlier complaints from the private sector on the shortfalls of
the A-76 process, it appears they view an imperfect process as better than no process at all.
Senator Barbara Mikulski, D-Md: As chairwoman of the Senate Appropriations Committee
(SAC), Senator Mikulski has both very real power and great influence in the annual
appropriations process. The Chairwoman has been an outspoken opponent to
private/competitions, and has applauded the moratorium’s continuation, saying “continuing
efforts to prevent outsourcing and contracting out is important both for American taxpayers and
our federal employees." 61 As the preceding quote suggests, she is also a major supporter for
protecting federal employee’s jobs and benefits. Hailing from Maryland, which has the third
largest population of Federal employees and second largest as a population of the state labor
force, this should come as no surprise. 62,63
Senator Mikulski has also helped craft legislation to match the Administration goals of
in-sourcing, by requiring agencies to list jobs being performed by contractors that may have
been improperly outsourced and evaluating if they should return in-house. 64 This is in effect the
reverse of the A-76 process, which required agencies to list activities that could be contracted
60
nd
Professional Services Council to Eric Cantor, July 13, 2011. Accessed on March 2 , 2014:
http://www.pscouncil.org/PolicyIssues/Legislation/Appropriations/Letter_Supporting_A_.aspx
61
Charles S. Clark, “Ban on A-76 Competitions for Outsourcing Extended in Omnibus Bill”, Government
nd
Executive, December 22, 2011. Accessed on March 2 , 2014
http://www.govexec.com/defense/2011/12/ban-on-a-76-competitions-for-outsourcing-extended-inomnibus-bill/35708/.
62
nd
“Federal Employees by State”, (Percentages) Accessed on March 2 , 2014:
http://www.governing.com/gov-data/federal-employees-workforce-numbers-by-state.html
63
nd
“Federal Employees by State” (Headcount) Accessed on March 2 , 2014:
http://www.theyworkforus.org/documents/FedEmployeesStats.pdf
64
nd
Website of Barbara Mikulski: Media. Accessed on March 2 2014:
http://www.mikulski.senate.gov/media/pressrelease/12-09-2009-1.cfm
19
out. It should be noted that despite her anti-contractor stance, Maryland ranked fourth in the
nation in contractor spending in 2013, receiving about $25.5 billion. 65
Richard Shelby, R-Al: Mr. Shelby is the ranking member of the SAC, and therefore the most
obvious candidate for Chairman should Republicans retake the Senate. As the senior Senator
from Alabama, Mr. Shelby has been in Congress since the 1970s and holds traditional
conservative views on the role of government. Although particularly outspoken on tax reform,
he is also supportive of small businesses and the benefits of private sector growth. 66 The
Senator has regularly voted against the appropriations bills that have maintained the
moratorium on private/public competitions, and based on his stated views would likely support
its appeal. 67
Harold “Hal” Rogers, R-Ky: Mr. Rogers is the current Chairman of the House appropriations
committee. As a veteran of Congress of over 30 years, Mr. Rogers is well-established and has
little concern for reelection as he won he reelection bid in 2012 with 78% of the vote. 68 Mr.
Rogers has a long legislative history, but only recently received the Chairmanship after the
House takeover in 2010. He is one of the most senior members of the House GOP and is
somewhat notorious for pork barrel spending, which has earned him a place on Citizens for
Responsibility and Ethics in Washington’s (CREW’s) list of “most corrupt” politicians the past
65
nd
USA Spending, Accessed on March 2 , 2014:
http://usaspending.gov/trends?trendreport=default&viewreport=yes&maj_contracting_agency_t=&pop_
state_t=&pop_cd_t=&vendor_state_t=&vendor_cd_t=&psc_cat_t=&tab=Graph+View&Go.x=Go
66
th
Website of Sen. Richard Shelby. Accessed on April 18 , 2014:
http://www.shelby.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=taxes-and-spending.
67
Project Vote Smart Website On Appropriations 2011 Voting. Accessed on April 18, 2014:
https://votesmart.org/bill/13101/34541/53266/2011-budget#.U1GEc1dgyHg
68
nd
Congressional Election Results, Accessed on March 2 , 2014:
http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/fe2012/2012congresults.pdf P.111
20
several years. 69 On Federal workers, he has not taken a strong stand for reform of the size or
benefits of the workforce, but has supported the Ryan Budget Plan, which called for a 10%
reduction through attrition, higher contributions to retirement plans and a continued pay freeze
through 2015. 70 Since the moratorium in 2007, Mr. Rogers has sponsored several amendments
to appropriations bills that would at least partially allow private/public competitions, but with
no success.
Sylvia Mathews Burwell, Director: We will need buy-in from our new Director on any proposal
for the 2015 budget. This will be the first budget released by the President with Ms. Burwell at
the helm, but she is no stranger to government. Ms. Burwell has been director since April of last
year, and previously served in the Clinton White House. In between these public positions, she
held several high-level positions in the private sector. As a former member of the Clinton’s
National Economic Council (NEC) Burwell was part of the move for privatization and shrinking
the size of government in a responsible manner. In her statement to the Senate Committee on
Budget, Ms. Burwell stressed her private sector experience, and her ability to forge bipartisan
agreements that bring about the budget surpluses and economic prosperity of the 1990s. 71 As
Director of OMB, one can assume she will be mindful of maintaining the President’s vision of
smarter contractor spending.
Policy Proposal
The following is a policy proposal to revise and promote a new public/private
competition process throughout the executive branch under the auspice of a revised Circular A69
nd
CREW Website, 2013 “Most Corrupt”. Accessed on March 2 , 2014:
http://www.crewsmostcorrupt.org/mostcorrupt/entry/hal-rogers
70
“The Path to Prosperity: A Blueprint for American Renewal”, Fiscal Year 2013 Budget Resolution. 32
71
Written Testimony of Sylvia Mathews Burwell before the Senate Committee on Budget. April 10, 2013,
nd
Accessed on March 2 , 2014:
http://www.budget.senate.gov/democratic/index.cfm/files/serve?File_id=2aa08fd8-502c-4a37-ab352ab5591be175
21
76. The OFPP will work closely with Congress and stakeholders to create an acceptable revision
to the existing guidance, which will be targeted for implementation in Fiscal 2015 pending the
results of a new Panel consisting of private and public sector stakeholders as well as subject
matter experts. Implementing this revision is dependent on Appropriations Committees in the
House and Senate removing current language that forbids these competitions from taking place.
Policy Authorization
Private/public competitions are effectively forbidden by law. Currently, the various
appropriations bills contain language identical to, or similar to the following: “None of the funds
appropriated by this Act may be used to plan for, begin, continue, finish, process, or approve a
public-private competition under the Office of Management and Budget Circular A–76 or any
successor administrative regulation, directive, or policy for work performed by employees
of…”. 72 To change this, the Administration will need to work with appropriators to ban this
prohibitive language from the various bills it affects. Future competitions cannot take begin
until the moratorium is lifted. As Acting Administrator of the OFPP, you will coordinate with
Director Burwell and the President to include this proposal in the President’s budget submission
to Congress, scheduled one month from today. In the budget submission, the President will ask
that prohibition on public/competition be banned from all future appropriations bills, pending
the results of the aforementioned panel which will be due September 1st.
Although the President’s budget submission on March 4th is the avenue for the formal
notice of the Administration’s intent to begin private/public competitions once again,
communication with SAC on this proposal should begin through back channels well beforehand.
The Administrator of the OFPP and its staff, with support from Director Burwell, will begin
working with Senator Mikulski and her staff to discuss changes in the process that will be
72
th
H. R. 3547. 64. Accessed on March 19 , 2014. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS113hr3547enr/pdf/BILLS-113hr3547enr.pdf,
22
required to gain their support. Based on her firm stance supporting federal employees and
against these competitions in the past, further protection for federal employees will be a focus
of this revision. These protections will include equal protest rights to contract decisions and
more support for displaced employees. Since the Panel’s results will be received by September,
Congress will have the opportunity to still include the language before Fiscal 2015 begins.
Policy Implementation
Understanding that the ability to move forward on this policy is dependent on Congress
agreeing to strike the language from appropriations bills, planning for implementation will need
to begin almost immediately if the October 1st deadline is to be met. Circular A-76 is a complex
and nuanced process, and the negative history that surrounds it will make a smooth
implementation with creditable improvements critical for any chance of success.
The OFPP will be responsible for revising the guidance, as well as central management
and oversight of the use of competitive studies. Deciding how the policy is revised should not
be done in a vacuum; input from all stakeholders as well as subject matter experts should be
sought before the update is formerly implemented. After the President delivers the budget to
Congress, OMB will immediately begin organizing a panel of experts and major stakeholders to
take comments on the planned changes supported by the administration and suggest other
adjustments needed to improve the process of carrying out these competitions. Essential
participants will be GAO, AFGE and other federal employee unions, research entities that have
published extensively on the issue such as the RAND Corporation and the Project On
Government Oversight (POGO), and leading public policy scholars and economists. The
inclusion of economists will be necessary to address some concerns with the calculation of
23
certain cost factors, such as overhead calculations and tax considerations. 73 The Panel will have
approximately four months to convene and reach a final recommendation by September 1st to
allow sufficient time for consideration by Congress.
The core process for A-76 will remain the same. The Circular will be available to all
agencies in the government for the process of converting recurring commercial activities to the
private sector. Agencies will still be required (unless previously exempt) to inventory their
operations into commercial and inherently governmental activities on a biannual basis (the FAIR
inventories). Commercial activities listed on these inventories will once again by open to
competition and transition to the private sector if deemed beneficial to the Government. If
performance of a competed activity falls below the promised level of the winning proposal, the
entity will receive a warning, if performance does not improve, the activity will be immediately
competed and the incumbent will not be allowed to participate.
While staying true to the original purpose and scope of the Circular, this revision will
seek to correct several flaws that hindered the effectiveness and credibility of previous updates.
The revision will address these flaws by improving the accuracy of the cost comparisons and
enforcing time caps on competition length. It will also provide a new mechanism that
encourages agencies to pursue these competitions without creating arbitrary quotas. The policy
further proposes creating a stronger oversight of both the cost evaluation and performance
period through the creation of centralized competition offices at the Department level. Lastly,
to increase the chances of passage in the Senate, additional protections and support will be
provided to federal employees who are competing in a comparison study. A policy that lifts the
73
Letter to OMB from the Center for Effective Government. “RE: Public Comments on the Use of Cost
th
Comparisons.” April, 2013. 2. Accessed on March 13 , 2014:
http://www.foreffectivegov.org/files/budget/OMB-cost-comparison-methodologies.pdf
24
moratorium on private/public competitions while improving these problem areas would be a
notable improvement on past revisions.
The majority of these changes can be made without formal legislation since A-76 is
simply an executive branch policy and not backed by force of law, like the FAR. 74 The process
itself will be changed several ways in order to make it more fair and efficient. The
Administration will press for equal rights for federal employees in these competitions, allowing
them to protest up through the GAO and Court of Federal Claims and allowing them to enjoy the
equivalent of award fees if the performance of their successful bid exceeds certain measures. 75
As additional support for employees who may lose a bid, they will qualify for the displaced
Federal Employee status, giving them priority for vacancies elsewhere in the government that
they might qualify for. 76 The twelve month time cap for a standard competition in the previous
revision will be reduced to six months, with extensions granted up to twelve, rather than
eighteen, months. If a competition exceeds this limit OMB will assess the situation and
determine if the complexity of the activity makes it prohibitive for contracting out. Other
common sense changes will be allowing private and public partnerships to form and compete as
a solution to a competitive study, as well as allowing currently outsourced activities to be open
for competition for a public sector solution. Lastly, certain cost factors will be reevaluated by
the Panel, including the standardized overhead rate and the public sector cost of capital, which
have been disparaged in the past. 77
The Bush Administration was criticized for the use of quotas to coerce agencies into
converting FTE to the private sector as a means for generating savings. Rather than a stick, this
74
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R40854.pdf P.1
Originally recommended by the CAP Study.
76
https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/workforce-restructuring/employee-guide-to-careertransition/
77
http://www.gao.gov/assets/230/225218.pdf
75
25
policy proposes a carrot. For the amount that agencies are able to show in savings based on
applicable cost comparisons, these efficiencies will be applied to future year sequestration
liabilities and count as demonstrated savings that do not need to be cut from the agency
budget. Agencies should be rewarded for smart spending and be allowed to reinvest these
savings into mission critical activities, such as the funding of specialized federal employees who
perform inherently governmental activities.
Lastly, to encourage the oversight of these cost comparisons, both during the
competition phase and after, this policy proposes the creation of a Department level position
with an appropriately sized supporting staff to strictly manage and evaluate the performance
and cost of commercial activities throughout component agencies, whether they are being
performed by contractors or in-house by Federal employees. POGO put forward a similar
recommendation in 2013, recommending a position modeled after DOD’s Director of Cost
Assessment and Program Evaluation. 78 To create this office, each component or sub-agency will
give up a position to their respective Department Headquarters, encouraging those with strong
acquisition background or who worked on these comparisons prior to the 2007 ban for
recruitment. By creating a specialized, centralized office independent of the agency in which
these comparisons are taking place, these competitions will receive a level of focus and
objectivity not seen previously.
Policy Analysis
An effective tool for comparing private and public sector costs and performance in an
equitable manner has been sought since the 1960s. Unfortunately, the private/public
competition process has either been ignored by agencies or plagued with inefficiency and
78
Letter to OMB: “Feds Vs. Contractors: Federal Employees Often Save Money, But an Advisory Panel is
Needed to Create Cost Comparison Model” from Project on Government Oversight (POGO) April, 2013.
26
controversy in its implementation. Circular A-76 is somewhat unique as a policy in that both
sides believe the process doesn’t work. 79 This may indicate something is inherently right about
this process, since both sides believe their competitors have a potential edge over them. It is
not by accident that the moratorium on private-public competitions has remained in place since
2007. The issue at heart, the size and role of government, is something that sharply divides the
general public and country’s political parties, and there is little stomach to reengage in a policy
that became relatively unpopular for both sides. As with any policy, this proposal has its share
of potential pitfalls, and the pros and cons as well as alternative solutions are presented in this
document before reaching a final recommendation.
This proposal aims to protect existing federal pay and benefits while injecting
competition and better contractor oversight by making several improvements to the 2003
revision of Circular A-76. The proposal is an attempt to enhance the equity, efficiency and
effectiveness of the private/public competition process in order to produce smart savings that
reduce the government footprint, as opposed to arbitrary, across the board spending cuts.
These are all marks of a successful policy, but these qualities have been the stated goal of OMB
and the OFPP each time a major revision has taken place, with little success. 80 This policy
provides a framework and ideal state for how this revision would take shape, but many details
of the final process simply cannot be known until the panel of experts convenes and open
comments are received, and this is certainly a weakness of the proposal. It is also important to
assess whether A-76 and private/public competitions in general are the best solution for
responsibly lowering discretionary budgets and controlling contractor spending.
79
Commercial Activities Panel. 38.
th
White House Press Release: “Big Savings Expected from Competitive Sourcing Initiative.” May 29 ,
2003. Accessed on March 23, 2014: http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/pubpress/200315.pdf.
80
27
Establishing an independent panel for evaluating and improving the previous cost
comparison methodology is not a new strategy in the debate on private/public competitions,
but it is important to have an open and candid discussion with all interested parties before
charging forward with an ambitious new policy. For example, the Welfare Reform Act of 1996
and more recently the Affordable Care Act had numerous hearings and forums for discussing
what the new laws should look like before they were signed into law and implemented. 81,82 The
CAP study, as referenced throughout this memorandum, was a panel created at the request of
Congress to address growing discontent with the competition process and evaluate options for
improvement. The members of the panel consisted of the Comptroller of GAO, the head of
AFGE, representatives from major contractor industries such as defense and IT services, as well
heads of OFPP and the Office of Personnel Management. A similar mix would need to be
assembled for this revision. One significant shortfall with the proposed policy is the tight
timeline, as the CAP study convened for over a year, and this new Panel would have only a few
months to reach an agreement if the start of Fiscal 2015 remains the targeted implementation
date. 83 Lastly, even though a majority opinion was reached, dissenting opinions from AFGE and
the National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU) accused the panel of being stacked with procontractor members that tilted the final decision against public competitors. 84 With such a
divisive issue, a full consensus seems unlikely in any new panel.
Integrating aspects of the FAR makes sense in general terms and the CAP in 2002
provided various guidelines for integrating the A-76 process with the FAR. Few specific details
81
United States Senate Committee on Finance. “Health Care Reform from Conception to Passage:Timline
of the Finance Committee’s Work to Reform America’s Healthcare System.” Accessed on March 31, 2014:
http://www.finance.senate.gov/issue/?id=32be19bd-491e-4192-812f-f65215c1ba65
82
th
Haskins, Ron and Schuck, Peter. “Welfare Reform Worked”, The Brookings Institution. February 28 ,
2012. Accessed on March 31, 2014: http://www.brookings.edu/research/opinions/2012/02/28-welfarereform-haskins.
83
Commercial Activities Panel. 5.
84
Commercial Activities Panel. 63, 68.
28
were offered in the CAP’s final report and the lack of detailed recommendations allowed the
previous Administration to shape the 2003 revision freely while justifying the changes as being
in the spirit of the CAP recommendations. 85 However, the comparison process can be made
more equitable and efficient by making the private/public competitions more in line with the
FAR guidance. 86 This proposal does attempt to add some specificity on how to meet some of
these recommendations by creating the oversight office, which will allow the same evaluation
team to examine most competing proposals, and by guaranteeing equal protest rights to all
parties.
Additional resource requirements are a concern in any proposal, especially in this
budget conscious period and when considering a process that is ultimately meant to reduce the
cost of government operations. Previous revisions of A-76 were criticized for the additional
expense they added to agency budgets, which is counterintuitive to the idea that this is a costcutting measure. 87 Establishing a dedicated position and staff to promote and help conduct
these private/public comparisons is therefore both a pro and a con to this proposal. Better
oversight, particularly during the performance of a contract, was lacking in previous versions of
the guidance. Creating a new department level position however means that resources would
have to be diverted in order to provide the staffing necessary to oversee these competitions.
Having each agency donate a single FTE to this purpose does bring this proposal closer towards
revenue neutrality and makes sense as a method to create a team that is appropriately sized
depending on the complexity of the Department while minimizing the impact to individual
85
Congressional Research Service. Walter Reed Army Medical Center (WRAMC) and Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-76: Implications for the Future. RL34140; August 21, 2007
Pg.4.
86
Commercial Activities Panel. 51.
87
Congressional Research Service. Circular A-76 Revision 2003: Selected Issues, by L. Elaine Halchin,
th
nd
RL32017, January 7 2005, 20. Accessed on March 22 , 2014:
http://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/RL32017_20050107.pdf
29
agencies. Lastly, the Panel should consider the fact that conducting private and public
competitions again could also lead to more bid protests and trials in the Court of Federal Claims,
draining resources and diverting attention from the already considerable load these two entities
carry. 88
Part of the problem that spurred this proposal is the growing cost of the more
professional and educated federal workforce. Reform of federal pay and benefits in order to
reduce government spending as well as workforce reductions through attrition have both been
considered in recent years. As mentioned previously this would almost certainly negatively
impact the recruiting and retention of quality employees. 89 It is a frequent argument that the
Federal workforce has already shouldered a considerate amount of the debt reduction through
a three year pay freeze and increased pension contributions. Reinstituting private/public
competitions does little to address this issue directly, and instead brings back a policy that could
cost many federal employees their jobs. 90 It will be important to frame the proposal as
something that is actually meant to protect federal workers pay and benefits for the future by
providing efficiencies that allow agencies to demonstrate savings without being forced into
across the board cuts or other reforms that gives employees no opportunity to compete.
Since this policy would make private/public competitions an option, not a requirement
of agencies, there is some risk that the agencies may simply ignore the guidance and not
conduct many, if any competitions. This was a problem in the 1970s and early 1980s until these
88
Congressional Research Service.GAO Bid Protests: Trends and Analysis. By Moshe Schwartz, Kate M.
Manuel and Lucy P. Martinez. RL40227; August 9, 2013. 9.
89
Society for Human Resource Management “Compensation and Benefits as Recruitment and Retention
Tools: The Impact of the Downturn”. 2009. Accessed on March 31, 2014:
https://www.shrm.org/Research/FutureWorkplaceTrends/Documents/Spotlight%20Q2%202009.pdf.
90
Congressional Research Service. Defense Outsourcing: The OMB Circular A-76 Policy. By Valerie Bailey
Grasso, RL30392; June 30, 2015. 15.
30
competitions gained popularity in the Reagan Administration. 91 Diverting funding and personnel
from Acquisitions offices to dedicated private/public competition functions and then having
them sit idle due to the optional nature of the policy would be disastrous. Fortunately,
evidence does suggest that there are ample service contracts and other commercial functions
being performed in-house that would be ideal for these competitions. 92
Timing also plays a role in evaluating this policy. With the bipartisan budget agreement
passed in December, funding levels are essentially set until fiscal 2016. This relative calm in the
seemingly endless budget battles of the last three years provides a window for new policy
initiatives that reduce discretionary budgets in a smart and meaningful way before
sequestration is scheduled to return in 2016. Allowing agencies to avoid sequestration cuts
through this measure and reinvest the savings generated is an innovative idea, but would also
cancel some of the overall savings that would have been produced through sequestration. It
may be a good way to incentivize agencies to begin conducting these competitions, but in the
future the reinvestment of savings may have to be reduced to a percentage of the total savings.
Although the policy is meant to bring out the positive byproducts of competition innovation and cost efficiency - it is important to acknowledge the risk of negative byproducts.
In this case, if a contractor should win a private/public competition, when the contract comes up
for re-competition, it is unlikely that that the skill sets will still be present in the agency. 93
Although there may be a competitive atmosphere the first time an activity is studied, there is
risk that the government MEO will be effectively hollowed out after an award to the private
sector and not pose a threat to the incumbent contractor, making the decision to privatize an
91
Congressional Budget Office. Contracting Out: Potential for Reducing Federal Costs, 1987, 7.
Office of Management and Budget. “Object Class Analysis of the U.S. Government.” 9.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2014/assets/objclass.pdf
93
th
th
FCW Staff. “Are They A-76 Winners or Second-Class Feds?” August 20 , 2007. Accessed on April 20 ,
2014: http://fcw.com/Articles/2007/08/20/Are-they-A76-winners-or-secondclass-feds.aspx?Page=4.
92
31
activity more permanent in the long run. It will be critical for the central oversight offices to
monitor the cost and performance in these circumstances to prevent any degradation due to a
lack of competitors.
There are several counter-proposals or alternative solutions that should be weighed
when considering the option of reissuing Circular A-76. One option is to instead request a
modification to the FAR to include a methodology for conducting private/public competitions.
This was first proposed by the CAP in 2002, but was not adopted by the Bush Administration. 94
Integrating with the FAR was seen as a positive step because it would allow the sunset of A-76
while still preserving a process for comparing federal and private costs and allowing for
competition. Changes to the FAR though require legislation and would not be managed by
OMB, reducing the influence the Administration can hold on how the policy is executed. 95
Another policy alternative brought forward in 2002 was the Employee Stock Ownership Program
(ESOP) and the Transitional Benefit Corporation Model (TBC), as means for reducing the size of
government and privatizing commercial activities.
The ESOP program, as the title suggests, provides stock ownership to federal employees
and essentially allows agency to privatize a function by setting up an initial starting capital for
federal employees to create a business out of a government function. 96 This program is positive
in that it allows employees a chance to control their destiny rather than simply outsourcing an
activity, and can reap long term savings if successful. However if the employee run enterprise
fails, the government could be stuck with additional costs. Federal employees also lose their
94
Commercial Activities Panel. 46
Congressional Research Service. The Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR): Answers to Frequently Asked
th
Questions. R42826. November 16 , 2012. 11.
96
http://m.reedsmith.com/files/Publication/76793701-5f5b-4495-bc3c2943519392a3/Presentation/PublicationAttachment/c12dc2dd-b62f-4b65-b80de80b8dffa8f5/a76costs.pdf p.62
95
32
federal benefits under this structure. 97 The TBC model is relatively complex, and involves
creating a non-profit organization that can perform as a stand-alone entity that acts as an
interface between government and private sector assets and activities, facilitating the
movement between the two. 98 One major pro of the TBC model is that transitioned employees
would be able to maintain the federal health and retirement benefits. 99 Firm details on how the
TBC model could be scaled for government wide use are lacking, and would likely take time to
develop. Both of these options provide alternative frameworks for reducing the size of
discretionary budgets in an intelligent way, but they are relatively untested in the public sector
processes and likely require longer planning and lead time with pilot programs at certain
agencies before a government-wide implementation. Full execution of such a proposal would
likely not be possible until FY 2016 or beyond.
Another policy alternative is to simply not act at this time, or delay acting until further
information can be gathered. With evidence of reduced contractor spending in 2013 and
agencies wary of future cuts and a wave of retirements looming, excessive contractor spending
and an unaffordable workforce may not be problem in two or three years. Taking the wait and
see approach avoids the risk of putting in place a potentially unpopular or ineffective strategy,
but it also takes much of the initiative away from the Administration and forces the White
House into a reactionary mode on counter-proposals that may not align with our procurement
policy goals.
97
http://m.reedsmith.com/files/Publication/76793701-5f5b-4495-bc3c2943519392a3/Presentation/PublicationAttachment/c12dc2dd-b62f-4b65-b80de80b8dffa8f5/a76costs.pdf P.63
98
http://www.mckennalong.com/media/site_files/340_MLA%20TBC%20brochure.pdf
99
http://m.reedsmith.com/files/Publication/76793701-5f5b-4495-bc3c2943519392a3/Presentation/PublicationAttachment/c12dc2dd-b62f-4b65-b80de80b8dffa8f5/a76costs.pdf
33
Political Analysis
Private/public competitions became an increasingly political issue over the past twenty
years, and particularly during the Bush Administration which saw a rapid expansion of the A-76
policy and abrupt moratorium. 100 Since the competition is frequently viewed as pro-contractor
and pro-business, many Republicans tend to favor the policy. This has been evident in the
repeated house votes to remove the language forbidding private/public competitions. 101,102
Democrats on the other hand originally initiated the restrictions on the A-76 process in 2007
and full ban soon after. The President actually did not take part in this vote as he was
participating in the Democratic primaries at that time, but he has in the past supported the
benefits of private/public interaction and the innovation and efficiencies that can occur when
the two sectors compete. 103,104 The split between the two parties on how to handle this issue
has recently become less clean cut. Republicans who have large numbers of Federal Employees
or military facilities in their districts have spoken out against the private/public competition
process, while some Democrats who represent districts with a large number of contractors have
voted to repeal the moratorium. 105
100
Office of Management and Budget Report on Competitive Sourcing Results, Accessed April 13th, 2014:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/procurement/reports/comp_sourc_fy2007.pdf
101
st
Library of Congress, Bill Summary and Status, H.AMDT.375, Amending H.R. 2017. Accessed on April 1 ,
2014: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d112:42:./temp/~bdBh0a::.
102
Charles S. Clark, “Ban on A-76 Competitions for Outsourcing Extended in Omnibus Bill”, Government
nd
Executive, December 22, 2011. Accessed on March 2 , 2014
http://www.govexec.com/defense/2011/12/ban-on-a-76-competitions-for-outsourcing-extended-inomnibus-bill/35708/.
103
th
st
United States Senate Roll Call Votes 110 Congress, 1 Session. “On Passage of Bill ( H.R. 1585 as
Amended) Accessed on April 1, 2014:
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&v
ote=0035 9.
104
Dean Baker, “True Free Market Proponents Should Support Private Public Competition”, The Guardian,
th
February 18 , 2014, Accessed on April 1st, 2014:
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/feb/18/free-market-competition-public-privatesector.
105
,
GovTrack.us. Voting Information on H.Amdt. 148 (Rigell) to H.R. 1960. Accessed on April 1 2014:
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/113-2013/h225.
34
Private/public competitions are not a particularly charged issue to the general
electorate. Polling data indicates the public has a dismal view of the federal government and its
effectiveness, though 62% have a positive view of federal workers. 106 The size and role of
government as well as Federal spending and resulting budget deficits have become a central
theme of recent elections and political battles in Washington. These larger issues tie directly
with federal pay and benefits as well as contractor spending. A policy that attempts to create
opportunities for businesses while protecting the benefits of federal employees should be
welcomed by both side of the aisle, but could also be torn apart as not being strong enough to
meet either goal. Watering down the effectiveness of the Circular in order to appeal to all sides
may be good politics, but not effective policy.
As noted in the background information provided, Sen. Mikulski is vocal in her
opposition to A-76 and private competitions, previously stating “Our federal employees are on
the front lines every day, working hard for America. These hardworking men and women
deserve to be treated fairly. I will not stop my fight to level the playing field for federal
employees and to protect them against unfair contracting out policies… and America’s taxpayers
from wasteful government spending, while bringing us one step closer to a fair, transparent, and
effective federal personnel policy” 107 Changes to the existing policy that directly address Sen.
Mikulski’s concerns have been included solely to increase the chances of gaining her support
and increasing chance of approval from like-minded Democrats.
106
Pew Research “Trust in Government Nears Record Low, But Most Federal Agencies Are Viewed
th
th
Favorably. October 18 , 2013. Accessed on April 13 , 2014: http://www.peoplepress.org/2013/10/18/trust-in-government-nears-record-low-but-most-federal-agencies-are-viewedfavorably/
107
Website of Barbara Mikulski: Media. Accessed on April 1 2014:
http://www.mikulski.senate.gov/media/pressrelease/07-09-2009-1.cfm.
35
For the past ten years, support or opposition to A-76 in Congress often split on party
lines and this hold true to the leaders of the House and Senate. Representative Hoyer, the
Minority Whip in the House and also hailing Maryland, holds similar views to Mikulski on
opposing A-76 as it is often viewed as unfairly targeting Federal employees. 108 He has however
been supportive of legislation that allows for public/private competitions when additional
safeguards for targeted employees are included. 109 It seems likely he would be supportive of
this proposal as it includes expanded protection for Federal workers. According to a coalition of
businesses that released a scorecard in 2012 ranking members on their support of “probusiness” legislation, which includes private/public competitions and A-76, leading Republicans
like Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan are very supportive of the legislation, while other
Democratic leaders like Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi are generally opposed. 110
A recent development that may hinder the ability for the Congress to pass legislation
forbidding the prohibition of any private/public competitions was a change in voting trend from
the House in 2013 regarding this issue. The House has voted to at least partially lift the ban and
allow A-76 competitions to begin again in fiscal 2011 and 2012, only to be struck down by the
Senate. 111 This changed in 2013, when fifty five republicans in the house joined democrats in
voting against ending the moratorium. 112 When looking closer at why this change took place, it
108
th
Press Release on Representative Hoyer’s Website. November 20 , 2004. Accessed on April 13, 2014:
http://hoyer.house.gov/press-releases/hoyer-on-removal-of-a-76-federal-employee-outsorcingprovision/
109
Press Release on Representative Hoyer’s Website. June 14th, 2006. Accessed on April 13, 2014:
http://hoyer.house.gov/press-releases/hoyer-on-house-passage-of-a-76-amendment-1328/
110
Business Coalition for Fair Competition “112 Congress Key Vote Scorecard 2011-2012”. Accessed on
th
April 13 , 2014: fhttp://governmentcompetition.org/uploads/2012BCFCKeyVoteScorecardWeb.pdf
111
Business Coalition For Fair Competition, Letter to Harold “Hal” Rogers. June 22, 2011. Accessed on
April 1, 2014: http://www.governmentcompetition.org/uploads/Coalition_Letter_Chairman_Hal_Rogers6-22-11.pdf
112
th
nd
Federal Daily “House Votes Down Outsourcing Measure”, June 17 , 2013. Accessed on March 2 ,
2014:
http://federaldaily.com/articles/2013/06/17/house-votes-down-outsourcing-measure.aspx.
36
appears a majority of the Republican votes against the 2013 repeal were from members in
districts with heavy military representation. 113 The historic flaws in the process and instances
performance degradation as a result of these flaws led several Republican members to speak
out against lifting the moratorium at the time.
A Democratic Administration putting forward this policy will likely turn some heads, but
it is important to remember the Clinton Administration also made extensive use of this policy
during the 1990’s and saw a transfer of public sector positions to the private sector that rivaled
that of the Bush Administration. 114 Although contractor spending may increase as a result of
this policy, something the current Administration has been fighting against, the purpose of the
revision is to reduce wasteful government spending while encouraging the smarter use of tax
payer dollars and this is in line Administration goals. 115 The policy would also put more control
in the executive branch on how it reduces spending, giving agencies the opportunity to generate
savings in an informed way rather than through across the board cuts. Lastly, it seeks to
accomplish these objectives but still protect the benefits that make the government an
attractive place to work.
This proposal coming from a Democrat should actually help the chances of negotiating
with the Senate, as they would likely trust a revision under this administration would seek
additional protections for federal employees. Simultaneously, pro-business groups and
members of Congress should welcome a chance for additional contracting opportunities with
113
NDAA Floor Debate in Opposition of the Rigell Amendment. Accessed on April 1 2014:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FMKorKCc3eU&feature=youtu.be
114
Gansler, Jaques S.“Moving Toward Market-Based Government: The Changing Role of Government as
th
the Provider” IBM Center for The Business of Government. 24. Accessed on February 10 , 2014:
http://www.businessofgovernment.org/sites/default/files/MarketBasedGovernment.pdf.
115
Executive Order 13576—‘Delivering an Efficient, Effective, and Accountable Government.” Accessed on
th
April 18 , 2014: http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/06/13/executive-order-deliveringefficient-effective-and-accountable-governmen.
37
private sector, despite some additional restrictions brought by this revision. Although the policy
includes additional oversight from central Department cost comparison teams, it is difficult to
guarantee there will not be a recurrence of a Walter Reed-type incident displaying contractor
negligence. Stricter time caps resulting in more direct OMB oversight will hopefully help identify
such problem before they become public and allow time for damage control.
The backlash from federal employees and their unions could be significant, hurting
morale and inhibiting the effectiveness of the competition process since cooperation and active
engagement from federal workers is critical for success. Private/public competitions were all
but ignored as a policy tool until the 1980’s and GAO noted the importance of such agency
engagement soon after to the 2003 revision. 116,117 As previously mentioned, AFGE and other
leading Federal Employee Unions have lobbied repeatedly against the reinstatement of the
Circular. The proposal does emphasize improvements on equity when considering private
sector and public sector proposals; providing federal employees the opportunity to protest an
agency decision through GAO and the Court of Federal Claims, recourse they were not afforded
in previous revisions.
In a RAND study on the effects of private/public competitions on employee morale and
the ability to take part in these competitions, the findings suggest several issues with the 2003
revision that did not create a positive and fair playing field for federal employees. These issues
included the inability for employees to effectively compete due to insufficient agency
investment, a lack of fair treatment in protests, and insufficient consideration for displaced
116
Congressional Budget Office. Contracting Out: Potential for Reducing Federal Costs, 1987, 8.
Competitive Sourcing: Implementation Will be Key to Success of New Circular A-76. Hearing Before the
Committee on Government Reform, House of Representatives. June 26, 2003. Statement of David M.
Walker, Comptroller General of the United States. Accessed on April 1, 2014:
http://www.gao.gov/assets/120/110124.pdf.
117
38
employees who are forced to take a pay or benefit (including pension) cut. 118 RAND went
further to say that agencies scrambling to meet strict conversion quotas and competition time
schedules provided little room for innovation; something the competitive environment is meant
to create. 119
A positive aspect of this proposal is that it seeks to address some of these morale issues
and acknowledges that these competitions require investment and dedicated personnel. The
creation of a Department level team to oversee and manage these competitions should alleviate
some of the pressure on offices that are competing for an activity. Explicitly guaranteeing
employees the ability to protest through GAO and the Court of Federal Claims will also diffuse
one of the key arguments that have been brought up continuously by Unions and other
representative groups. 120 Providing award bonuses for successful in-house offers is another
positive way to reward employees for competing successfully and treating both sides equally.
The new initiatives for aiding displaced workers should also help reduce some previous criticism
from these groups, and the Panel can work in conjuncture with OPM on additional solutions to
this problem.
Overall, the political viability of this policy is tenuous, but not prohibitive. The Senate is
historically opposed to any move to lift the moratorium, and the political winds seem to be
shifting both parties against a return to A-76. However, this opposition is focused on the
existing policy. As described in this proposal, several revisions will be made that respond to
some of the key flaws in the existing Circular and the Panel will be charged with finding a
118
Competitive Sourcing and the Morale of Federal Employees. Hearing Before the Committee on
Governmental Affairs, United States Senate. July, 2003. Statement of Frank Camm. Accessed on April 1,
2014: http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/testimonies/2005/CT211.pdf.
119
Ibid.
120
nd
AFGE Website: “Material for Lobbying Senators on A-76 Safeguards” Accessed on March 2 , 2014:
https://www.afge.org/index.cfm?page=Privatization&Fuse=Content&ContentID=2605.
39
solution that is agreeable to the majority of stakeholders. Congress will still have the option of
maintaining the language forbidding these competitions if they are not satisfied with the panel’s
results. Ultimately, if both sides believe the playing field to be level, the political and material
benefits to bringing this policy back should outweigh the political costs.
Recommendation
Based on the information provided and weighing the pros, cons, and alternatives of this
proposal, it is recommended that you approve this initiative to allow private/public
competitions to once again be conducted by government agencies through a modified Circular
A-76; keeping in mind any revision is dependent on Appropriations Committees in the House
and Senate removing the current language that forbids these competitions from taking place.
Although the A-76 process has been contentious in the past, it does provide a unique tool for
the Government to inject a competitive atmosphere that is sometimes lacking in the public
sector. It also gives private companies new opportunities to compete for commercial activities
that may be better handled outside of the public sector. Competition will lead to a more
innovative and cost efficient work environment.
If executed properly, this policy will help address the problem of finding a solution for
shrinking discretionary budgets in a way that does not simultaneously hurt the Government by
making federal employment less appealing or allowing runaway contract spending.
Private/public competitions will generate real savings for the Government on the terms of the
agencies that actually execute these budgets, rather than through arbitrary cuts. Agency heads
will have the opportunity to reduce their funding requirements through competition and avoid
(at least some) across the board cuts in the future. This process keeps federal employee
benefits intact and revisions made will provide public sector workers with more protections
40
under this process than they received previously. Although shrinking the federal workforce is
one potential outcome, it is not the goal; the goal is smarter spending and a leaner, more
professional federal workforce focused on accomplishing inherently governmental tasks.
Another reason for my recommendation to move forward is the fact that you, the
Director, and even the President will have ample time to change your minds and adjust this
policy before government- wide implementation. Since a panel will be convened to discuss and
hash out details of the revision, this not a proposal that is difficult to reverse if necessary. The
Administration has time to continue weighing options to determine if this truly is the route it
wants to follow and alter course. Just because work will be done and a recommendation is
given does not hold the Administration to following through with it. 121 It is critical though that
work begin immediately on the implementation of this proposal, as the timeframe is one
potential pitfall.
As mentioned in the analysis of this proposal, one concern with this policy is the
timeframe allotted and if the necessary individuals can be brought together and have enough
time to produce a clean and thorough recommendation on the refined details of a revised
Circular A-76. Again, once this proposal is approved and staff starts to coordinate and form this
panel, it should become quickly apparent if more time will be needed. The policy does not need
to be effective October 1st, only the language in the appropriations bills will need to be removed
by this time. The schedule will not be so rigid as prioritize the timeliness over quality of the final
recommendation.
121
th
Jackie Calmes, “Obama’s Deficit Dilemma” The New York Times, February 27 , 2012. Accessed on April
6, 2014: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/27/us/politics/obamas-unacknowledged-debt-to-bowlessimpson-plan.html?pagewanted=all
41
Politically, it may prove difficult to convince Congress, and particularly Democrats or
representatives with strong federal and particularly military presences in their districts to
remove the prohibitive language in appropriations bills. This hesitation is understandable given
past failures of the policy, but improved protection for Federal workers enhanced contractor
oversight and the inherent pro-business opportunities created by these competitions should
incentivize both parties to be open to discussion.
The time is right to end the moratorium on private/public competitions and create a
new revision of the A-76 guidance. With your approval, we will arrange a briefing for the
Director on this proposal immediately.
42
Sean Patton
1206 Half St. SW • Washington, DC • 20024 • 505-412-9728 • [email protected]
Experience
Budget Analyst (GS-12), Transportation Security Administration - Arlington, VA
Nov. 2012 - Present
 Formulate and plan out-year budgets for security operations, training, and risk-based security programs
 Responsible for managing allocations of appropriated funds to programs and ensuring ADA compliance
 Collaborate with TSA program offices to ensure proper and efficient execution of appropriated funds
 Provide guidance to major acquisition programs in TSA on budget reporting requirements for DHS HQ
 Draft responses and help brief DHS, OMB and Congressional Staff on budget related questions and QFRs
as well as coordinate and review responses from TSA program offices for these items
 Evaluated and refined the TSA Federal Cost Estimating Methodology used for awarding private
screening contracts to airports participating in the Screener Partnership Program
Financial Specialist (GS-9), Transportation Security Administration - Arlington, VA
Feb. 2011 – Nov. 2012
 Provided guidance and budget support for various programs within TSA Headquarters. Including:
o Creating monthly Status of Funds reports showing detailed spending data for each program
o Aiding in spend plan development and providing year-end guidance on spending activity
o Acting as funds certifier to approve procurement requests, purchase documents, and program
travel documents including authorizations and expense reports
 Regularly updated and analyze personnel reports regarding FTE, TSO Workforce and payroll mischarges
as well as provide analysis and projections on the $3 billion annual TSO budget
 Designed a new Status of Funds snapshot report that condenses the complex agency account system
into a simple and brief document
 Trained others in the budget team on how to execute and analyze payroll and Status of Funds reports
 Team lead for the Security Ops. Spend Plan Development and leadership briefings for FY12 and FY13
 Created ad-hoc reports and worked on special projects as needed by leadership
Bank Operations Associate, Ally Financial - Fort Washington, PA
Nov. 2009 – Sept. 2010
 Responsible for managing and analyzing all negative balance accounts in the bank
 Trained and helped direct other associates in the overdraft monitoring and resolution process
 Assisted in development of policies and procedures for new Interest Checking product
Education & Academic Honors
Johns Hopkins University: Washington, DC
M.A. Public Management
Franklin & Marshall College: Lancaster, PA
B.A. Business and History
Dean’s List
Member of Phi Alpha Theta Historical Honor Society
May 2014
May 2008
2004-2008
Spring 2006-Present
Skills, Coursework & Training
 Pursuing Certification in Budget Analysis and Federal Financial Management from Management
Concepts. Coursework taken includes:
o



Appropriations Law; Federal Financial Management Overview; Budget Execution; Budget Formulation; Federal
Accounting Fundamentals; Budgeting and Accounting: Making the Connection.
Obtained Secret Clearance in May 2011
Highly proficient with Microsoft Office Suite, including Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Access, and Visio
Experienced with various Federal Financial Systems, including Finance & Procurement Desktop (FPD),
FedTraveler, Oracle Business Intelligence, and next generation Periodic Reporting System (nPRS).