GWACs under Fire

There aren’t enough people in the acquisition workforce to get the job done. That’s just a fact.

Out of the imperative to shorten cycles and streamline the process, the Government Wide Acquisition Contract (GWAC) was born.

The concept is simple. Let one agency conduct a competition for a set of requirements (the broader, the better) and award multiple, long-term contracts, all with the same broad statement of work (SOW). Then place orders against those contracts on behalf of any agency with (1) a requirement that fits the statement of work and (2) money in hand. Also, charge them a fee to use the contract to offset the cost of conducting the competition and administering the ordering process.

The General Services Administration (GSA) was the first agency to really leverage the concept. GSA is currently administering 10 different GWAC programs for technology acquisition alone. Most of the current activity is through the Millennia and ANSWER programs. The Department of Homeland Security has a program they call EAGLE. NASA’s program is called SEWP and is in its fourth iteration (SEWP IV). Treasury calls theirs FedSource and Interior’s program is called GovWorks. DOD has more than you could count.

The GSA programs each consist of 10 to 30 contracts from which any Federal agency can order. The Millennia program consists of 9 contracts and runs through 2009. ANSWER has 10 contracts and runs through 2013. The problem with both is that their SOW’s are somewhat narrow (some requirements just don’t fit) and their ceilings will probably max out long before the terms of the contracts expire. Millennia and ANSWER each have a ceiling of $25 billion and will probably max out this year.

GSA’s Alliant program is supposed to replace both Millennia and ANSWER, but award of the Alliant contracts was more than a year late (they were finally awarded on August 29th, 2007) and they are currently under protest. When a “disappointed bidder” (GovSpeak for loser) protests an award, the contract is put on hold until the protestor’s claim can be adjudicated. In this case, there were 7 disappointed bidders that felt strongly enough to file a protest.

Congress and GAO are also concerned that the concept of a one-time competition followed by years of “directed orders” stifles competition. This concern has given rise to provisions in multiple bills currently before Congress to require that each delivery order be competed among all holders of GWAC contracts (at least within a program). This would effectively wipe most of the process streamlining benefits that gave rise to the GWAC concept to begin with.

GWAC proponents took another body blow when a recent court decision overturned the long-standing Government position that delivery orders on competitively awarded GWACs were not subject to protest. The decision is on appeal, but two different bills before congress would codify the decision in law, making the appeal moot.

Hmmm… Heavy restrictions on going outside a home agency, severely restricted use of T&M orders, a requirement to compete every order and no more safe haven from protests. Is it any wonder that GWACs have lost a lot of their luster in the acquisition community?

But, what’s the alternative? The acquisition workforce is still critically understaffed and the goods and services still need to be purchased. I certainly don’t have the answer, but something has to give!

Watch this space…


Today’s Trivia Tidbit – GWACs are serious business for both contractors and the acquisition community. Nonetheless, agencies seem to find a source of amusement in the acronyms generated by their program names. Just a few examples…

ANSWER – Applications ‘N Support for Widely-diverse End-user Requirements
EAGLE – Enterprise Acquisition Gateway for Leading Edge solutions
SEWP – Solutions for Enterprise-Wide Procurement

Of course, NASA had to take it to the next level. The SEWP program office has the official title of Business Operations and Workstation Laboratory. You guessed it.

It’s the SEWP BOWL!