Whether it’s needs versus wants, open conversations versus regulations to protect intellectual property or oversight versus open development, agencies and the commercial sector must find the happy medium for acquisition processes to be truly reformed. These were the tough issues experts discussed at AFCEA International’s SOLUTIONS Series event today. The conference, which took place at the National Conference Center, Lansdowne, Virginia, as well as via the SOLUTIONS the Web site, began with a presentation by John W. Nyce of the U.S. Department of the Interior and ended with a town hall meeting where attendees posed their questions and made their points to Maj. Gen. (Sel.) George J. Allen, USMC, director C4 and CIO of the U.S. Marine Corps; Frank Anderson of the Defense Acquisition University; and Tony Montemarano, DISA’s component acquisition executive. In between, experts on three panels presented their viewpoints on training, requirements and lessons learned.

While some speakers and panelists said they believe the acquisition system could be improved but is generally solid, others pointed out where total reform is needed. Some of the key points shared:

• “We are 20th century managers managing a 21st century work force,” Montemarano said.

• Need to bring the younger generation—the “G Generation,” which stands for Google Generation—to these types of discussions and conferences.

• Top three issues identified by the Town Hall panelists:
Anderson:
*Technology in the work place is moving faster than the acquisition processes that are in place.
*Aging work force.
*Reviewing curriculum to ensure proper training.

Montemarano:
*Processes intended to be flexible; work force culture NOT flexible.
*Acquisition processes need to be embraced NOT avoided.
*DISA move to Fort Meade and agency is losing talent daily.

Gen. Allen:
*Technology is moving faster than we can acquire it.
*Network security needs to be built in upfront.
*“Green” IT.

• The IT procurement paradigm is shifting at least in part because of a shift to cloud computing by DOD. Both the government and industry is driving this change.

• Benefits of cloud computing include cost effectiveness, quickness, increased flexibility and “green.” Challenges include security, vendor management and pricing.

• To move to cloud computing, a team that understands the requirements must be formed; a governance model must be in place; and employee training must improve.

• “I’m not telling you that I have the answers. I don’t think anyone does,” Nyce said about cloud computing challenges.

• “We have not made any kind of strides in putting our acquisition [processes] in electronic form,” Nyce stated.

• The cornerstone to describing requirements well is communications between the government and industry.

• There is a lack of willingness on the part of government agencies to talk to industry. The RFI process is NOT a good way to understand the available solutions.

• Many times, government agencies talk about what they want rather than what they need.

• One-on-one meetings with contractors are better than large forums like Industry Days, BUT government procurement personnel must be sure to share the exact same information with each company.

• Must be communications among the user, contract officer and procurement office. Bring the user in earlier in the procurement process.

• “As a contractor, I am disappointed with the government’s commitment to using small businesses,” Anthony Jimenez said during one of the panel sessions.

• Solutions exist to solve current problems, but they cannot be identified quickly.

• Recommendations: improve communications between government organizations; improve acquisition planning; define requirements better to increase the success rate; and trust the contractors’ judgment.

• The challenge in setting requirements for IT is the balance between just enough definition and not too much definition.

• Oversight of IT projects must be different than it is for other platforms.

• Training at the Defense Acquisition University needs to include courses in purchasing IT, which is different than purchasing platforms.

• Need to have the right people in place, and it’s not just about training—it’s also about experience.

• Need to move away from proprietary solutions.

• Need simpler, smaller, net-enabled solutions, but policy is not flexible enough.

• Opinions vary on the acceptability of teleworking.

Acquisitions experts from the government and private sectors agree that the procurement system is broken, but they do not necessarily agree about how to fix it. Meeting at AFCEA International’s SOLUTIONS Series conference today, a consensus was achieved on contributing factors to the problem. Long acquisition cycles strip the effectiveness of many of the IT systems that are being purchased by the time they hit the field. Time and cost estimates are not realistic from the beginning of the purchasing process. Leadership to bring about true change is lacking. These were just some of the topics brought up during today’s discussion, a discussion that will continue tomorrow on the second day of “IT Acquisition: Shifting to a Modern Paradigm,” taking place at the National Conference Center as well as broadcast via the Web.

Many attendees were interested in a quick way to share some of the highlights of the speeches and panels with their bosses. Among the ideas and information shared during the conference:

•“Shouldn’t we look for leaders who can clear up the complexity? Can we make this any harder?” Sue Payton said.

•The U.S. Army is changing its acquisition strategy to procuring services.

•The Army’s Program Executive Office (PEO), Enterprise Information Systems, is changing the title of deputy PEOs to portfolio information managers.

•The Army’s acquisition IT enterprise will be evaluated and changed in manageable chunks, each with its own schedule, budget and set of requirements. Now, the need exists to work on the seams as well.

•The U.S. Marine Corps needs: energy alternatives for the tactical environment; products that will lighten the load Marines must carry; and forward logistics support ideas.

•Realistic and knowledge-based estimates of time and cost must be at the beginning of the procurement process. Cost estimates are provided with a 50 percent level of confidence; this should be 80 percent.

•The acquisition work force must be trained better and expanded.

•Acquisition requirements must be reformed in terms of margin and realism; the military must accept that programs may go wrong yet take risks.

•Government needs to be more involved with industry. Acquisition rules MUST be modified so that government organizations can have discussions directly with companies.

•Industry needs to help agencies understand their innovations and ideas by describing them in a way that procurement officers can UNDERSTAND what they offer.

•Every service needs cybersecurity built in upfront, not as an add-on.

•Some said warfighters are using all the commercial technology they can get their hands on because official procurement takes too long; others disagreed, saying there is discipline in the services, and warfighters follow the rules when using communications systems.

•Cloud computing is the future for the DOD.

•Standards are good but also can stifle innovation.

•Process for certification and accreditation for commercial products is necessary but takes too long.

•Some said that warfighters’ needs MUST be considered when developing IT systems; others said that warfighters can’t be asked to define requirements because they don’t know about available technologies. For example, how do warfighters ask for iPhone capabilities if they don’t know what those capabilities are?

•“How do you purchase an iPhone in an eight-track acquisition world?” Joe Grace asked. One answer is ID/IQ contracts.

•One problem is the way contracts are designed. For example, contractors are paid to provide help desks, but the goal is to purchase systems that won’t require users to call for help all the time. How can this approach be reversed?

•Commercial companies such as Marriott International face the same types of IT procurement issues. To address them, the company has a strategy to grow, but grow sensibly. The company used to “build to last,” but now “builds to change,” Laura Bouvier said.

What do YOU think is the biggest problem with the government acquisition system? How do YOU think it can be fixed?

Top Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) officials met with industry today to share their strategy and plans for the future. Lt. Gen. Carroll F. Pollett, USA, director, DISA told attendees at the Forecast to Industry Day that the agency is looking to the commercial sector to engage with DISA’s leaders and help shape the future. Although he is considering developments in the short term—four to five years—he is especially focused on where the military and the United States will be 10 years from now as he makes plans and fills current requirements.

Technology alone is not DISA’s primary concern, Gen. Pollett said. With a vision of “Leaders Enabling Information Dominance in Defense of our Nation,” the agency’s focus is on how to deliver capabilities to the warfighter more efficiently and effectively. Commanders aren’t concerned with how a capability is delivered, he pointed out, they just want the capability at their disposal when they need it. The difference in bringing command and control, infrastructure and information assurance to the edge in today’s environment is that the edge is everywhere in irregular warfare, he said. The general emphasized that he is not interested in proprietary solutions.

This strategy will require resources—both in funding and personnel, he noted. “You can have dreams and visions, but without resources, all you have are dreams and visions,” the general stated. Some of his concerns include retaining intellectual capital when the agency moves its headquarters from Arlington, Virginia, to Fort Meade, Maryland, as a result of the Base Realignment and Closure decision. To address this issue, DISA’s leaders are reviewing what skill sets are needed, which may result in retraining and shifting personnel, he explained.

The general has spoken with the combatant commanders of nearly all of the combatant commands and the leaders of each of the services to improve his understanding of their requirements. These meetings also contributed to an understanding of how DISA can leverage its relationship with the commercial sector. However, DISA is not making a to-do list as it has in the past. Instead, it is creating a living document that can be changed over time, he added.

“What will we do next?” he asked rhetorically. “That’s where my focus is. What am I doing so international coalitions, national-level leaders and warfighters have capabilities? How do we partner with industry to accomplish this?” He agreed that the partnership announced yesterday between the General Services Administration and DISA will result in greater efficiencies, improved processes, more capabilities to the warfighter, “and if we’re lucky, we’ll save some money in the process,” the general said.

In addition to DISA partnering with industry, Gen. Pollett said the agency also needs companies to partner with each other to develop enterprise solutions.

The Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) and the General Services Administration (GSA) have entered into a partnership to streamline acquisition of commercial satellite communications (SATCOM) services. Announced yesterday, the agreement will lead to a hybrid of GSA’s multiple award schedules and indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity (ID/IQ) contracts. Officials of both organizations are lauding this collaborative effort as “historic” and agree that the Future Commercial SATCOM Access contract will be worth $5 billion over a 10-year period. The partnership has been years in the making, GSA and DISA officials allowed.

During a media roundtable, officials from both agencies agreed that the partnership will offer benefits in a number of areas. It creates a common commercial SATCOM marketplace for all of their customers, including federal, state and local government organizations. By sharing contract replacement costs, it will save taxpayers millions of dollars, though officials did not share specific estimates of the savings. It also ensures that all government customers have access to technology that meets government information protection regulations.

DISA market research was used to determine the targeted service areas to be included under the partnership. The result was a focus on transponded capacity, which includes dedicated bandwidth on a commercial satellite in any commercially available frequency band; subscription services, which involves pre-existing, pre-engineered fixed satellite service (FSS) or mobile satellite service (MSS); and end-to end solutions such as bandwidth that can include FSS and MSS components as well as hybrid solutions of both.

The GSA’s Schedule 70 will be refreshed to accommodate the transponded capacity and subscription services, and ID/IQ contracts will be established for customized end-to-end solutions. The strength of the program is that there is a 20-year potential life cycle that features “on ramps” and “off ramps” so that companies that are not selected immediately can vie for the business at a later time, DISA and GSA officials agreed.

The Schedule 70 refresh announcement is planned for the first quarter of fiscal year 2010, and a draft ID/IQ request for proposals release is scheduled to take place during the second quarter of fiscal year 2010.

On the DISA side, this agreement allows for multiyear commercial SATCOM leases, although traditionally services have been procured using operations and maintenance funding, which covers a single year. However, if additional funding is granted, there is no limit to the length tasks can go on, including to the length of the contract. DISA will maintain its decentralized ordering authority from the U.S. Defense Department; the GSA is simply providing the vehicles.

Savings are expected to be realized by both vendors and the government as a result of this partnership. Companies will be able to present their solutions to a single source through a single process, saving them overhead expenses. The government will be able to take advantage of the economies of scale. In bandwidth buys alone, savings of 10 percent to 15 percent could be realized, says Bruce T. Bennett, director of satellite communications, teleports and services, DISA.

Chris Gunderson of the Naval Postgraduate School posited some interesting ideas during yesterday afternoon’s plenary sessions about why everyone keeps hearing the same things about changes that need to be made. Certain things, he suggested, we should just acknowledge and move past:

• Gunderson believes that we have all the policy we need; we don’t need to add more policy.
• He added that there is a federation issue. If you can’t federate systems, you can’t be netcentric.
• Considering the engineering and boundary perspectives, engineers just can’t bolt on security after the fact–have to make sure it’s in up front. David Minton of Raytheon, who partnered with Gunderson to create the World Wide Consortium for the Grid, explained this with a metaphor: Safety is built into commercial airplanes, because the models they are based on are built to high-end specifications. To make airplanes (or airlines) affordable for consumers, engineers have to consider what to take out, and it won’t be the safety features. Minton said this model can help us understand how to put security in the enterprise.
• Resonating with other panels at SOLUTIONS, Gunderson emphasized that there isn’t not a technology issue anymore. Service-oriented architecture, cloud technology, and open source communites can get us there.
• However, given facts of life with regard to scale, time and cost, there is no way to get there from here, as he put it, outside “Main Street.” Many times, the solutions we need are already on the shelf.
• Gunderson advocated for an integrated perspective in which the acquisition model is not segregated from the command and control it supports. “Continuing improvement of business is part of C²,” he said.

^{Gunderson focused on the acquisition piece for the rest of his presentation, noting that there were ways of accelerating the process that included using more off-the-shelf solutions. “If the government aims at closing the gaps in technology for military missions … the competitive process will ensure that more off-the-shelf solutions are available,” he said.}

^{One of the problems Gunderson observed with the current acquisition process is that by the time an off-the-shelf solution is available, its already out of date. As a result, “After many years and  billions of dollars spent,  the promise of SOA in DoD is largely unfulfilled,” Gunderson said.}

^{What really needs to change is that perspectives must broaden, Gunderson said. It’s no longer enough to monitor quality and security, “It’s not just quality, but value, which is reliability and trusted significant content with continuous improvement. Information assurance is not just security, Assurance includes supportabilty and availability as well,” he said.}

The U.S. Air Force is redoubling its efforts to reach out to small businesses. David Van Buren, principal deputy assistant secretary of the Air Force for acquisition, and Ronald Poussard, director of the service’s small business programs, explain that this effort seeks to remove the “check-the-box” mentality often associated with small business outreach. Innovation, agility, responsiveness and efficiency are some of the attributes small companies offer, but Van Buren also says, “We don’t have enough competition now. Growing these innovative small businesses will help us rectify that by increasing the industrial base.” The service plans to enhance its relationship with small businesses by helping them move into the more mature states of development and production.