-------
OGMS .0.0 .
-------
Contracts Management:
The People and The Process
-------
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary
Introduction
Budget Discussion
Profiling EPA's Contracts Managers
Survey Analysis
Interviews with Senior Managers
Focus Groups
Findings and Recommendations
A Model for Sound Contracts Management
The Appendix
9
12
20
36
41
47
60
-------
-------
Executive Summary
The large amount of environmental legislation passed by the Congress over the
past few years has placed increasing demands on EPA in a restrictive
budgetary environment. This has lead the Agency more and more to contract-
out its work to the point where half of EPA's professional* and administrative staff
are involved in some fashion with contracts administration and over fifty percent
of the Agency's budget (excluding construction grants) is spent via contract
vehicles.
With this in mind, the Administrator and the Assistant Administrator for
Administration and Resources Management asked the Management and
Organization Division to lead a task force effort to review EPA headquarters
contracts management activities and suggest ways of improving them. The
remainder of this executive summary describes the goals of the study, the
methodology applied in conducting this study, the cross-cutting themes that
emerged from our review and the recommendations that we have provided for
senior management consideration.
The findings and recommendations presented by the Task Force reflect the
shared responsibility for sound contracts management in EPA : responsibility
that transcends all segments of the Agency and all levels of the organization.
From the Administrator to the work assignment manager, and from OARM to all
other program offices, contracts management is broad-based. It is done and
must continue to be done in partnership; likewise, everyone must be a player in
the solutions and improvements.
-------
Study Goals
The goals of the study were to :
• Describe the essential elements that should be present in a model
environment for effective contracts management (for the purpose of this study,
"contracts managers" are those people who are involved in managing contracts
in the program offices where day-to-day oversight occurs) and suggest ways of
moving the Agency toward adopting these measures. •
• Assess the people on the frontline of program office contracts management
(project officers (POs), work assignment managers (WAMs), delivery order
project officers etc.) to determine their perceptions about what is working and
what areas need improvement to help them discharge their responsibilities;
,»
• Determine what Agency support systems are available to contracts
managers (e.g. management support, ADP support, training, policy guidance,
financial and contracts technical assistance etc.) and how they can be
improved.
Study Methodology
The Task Force used the following methodological tools to get different
perspectives on these topics :
+ For the purposes of this study, the Task Force selected three media to
review : OSWER, OPTS and OW;
+ A computer profile of four thousand Agency contracts managers to
determine their age, experience levels, grades, educational backgrounds, etc. ;
^ Twelve focus group sessions were conducted with over one hundred fifty
headquarters program contracts officials to discuss contracts administration
issues;
-------
• A fifty-four question survey was sent to eight hundred and five project
officers and work assignment managers to gauge their opinions on various
contracts administration topics; and finally,
• Personal interviews were conducted with sixty-five senior level
headquarters program managers in the threo selected media offices.
Key Findings
The following is a summary of the central findings of this study. Greater detail is
provided in the body of this report.
• Cultural Change Required
The Task Force has concluded that the Agency's culture needs to be changed
to put much greater emphasis on sound contracts management. This change
can only take place if senior managers place emphasis on this function over a
sustained period of time.
• EPA is Highly Leveraged
Half of EPA's professional and administrative employees are in some way
involved with managing contractors and over fifty percent of the Agency's
budget is spent on contractors.
• Management Awareness
Very few senior managers (i.e. DAAs, Office and Division Directors) have any
personal knowledge of, or involvement with contracts management in their
organizations. In addition, a large percentage of headquarters POs and WAMs
feel their supervisors are somewhat to not at all knowledgeable about contracts
management.
• Contracts Managers are High Level Employees
Contrary to widespread belief, our profile of contracts managers revealed that
they tend to be older, better educated, higher graded, and more experienced
than the average EPA employee.
-------
• A Skills Balance is Needed
Seventy-eight percent of POs and WAMs in the Agency are either scientists or
engineers. This points toward the need to balance out these employees'
technical skills with essential administrative skills.
• Resources Needed for Training
Agency contracts managers are not able to be trained due to too few course
offerings by PCMD. Existing in-house staff resources and contract dollars are
inadequate to meet the need.
• Training Courses Require Redesign
POs, WAMs and managers felt strongly that the current project officer and
contracts administration courses need to be revamped to put much greater
emphasis on hands-on, day-to-day management issues such as people
management, cost estimation, financial/workload tracking, etc. Also, all felt that
a new course geared specifically to the functions and roles of the WAM was
needed.
• Central Databases Needed
Most of the POs and WAMs expressed the need for central databases that
included such things as a current listing of Agencywide work assignments, past
performance of contractors on work assignments, and a list of all umbrella
contracts in the Agency. They felt this would help them reduce the potential for
duplication and weed out poor performing contractors. Access to procurement
status and central financial systems is also needed.
• Strengthen Certification, Add Recertification
The present certification process is often circumvented and waivers are
commonly granted giving the impression that management does not take the
requirement seriously. Also, periodic recertification is essential so that POs and
WAMs are kept current with changing laws and regulations.
• Demonstration of Remedial Action Needed
Contracts managers fee! vulnerable because they do not know how to deal with
contractors who are performing poorly or how to not select these same
contractors when contracts are renewed.
-------
• Central Ombudsmen are Helpful
Contracts managers functioned more efficiently and effectively when there was
a centra! extramural coordinator in their office. This individual provided
technical assistance and budget advice on a full-time basis and acted as an
historical corporate body of knowledge.
Next Steps
The Findings and Recommendations section of this report presents a host of
suggestions designed to strengthen contracts management. While all of these
are important, the Task Force believes the Agency should undertake certain
steps immediately:
Announce the Administrator's philosophy and expectations for sound
contracts management in a policy statement. Call for each AA/RA to
outline the contracts management improvement plans they will put in
place during FY89. Include discussions of contracts management in
quarterly SPMS meetings with the Deputy Administrator.
Establish a PCMD workgroup to design a comprehensive career
development/training program for contracts managers and their
supervisors. This group will be headed by the Office of Human
Resources Management with participation from PCMD personnel,
program officials, and a representative sample of Project Officers and
Work Assignment Managers.
Establish a PCMD workgroup to strengthen the National Program
Manager (NPM) role of the Division, including developing accountability
criteria, certification/recertification requirements, and communications
improvements, and sponsoring a demonstration program on corrective
action.
Implementation of these recommendations will allow the Agency to carry out its
environmental mandates in a manner consistent with efficient and effective
-------
management practices. We hope that this report contributes to a better
awareness of the importance of contracts management and assists Agency
managers in the performance of their responsibilities.
-------
Introduction
In May of this year, the Assistant Administrator for Administration and Resources
Management commissioned this study of ttm contracts management process at
EPA's headquarters offices. At his request, the Management and Organization
Division led a Task Force effort to conduct the study. The Task Force was made
up of eight EPA employees from OARM, ORD, RTF and OIA. OPPE was unable
to join the Task Force due to previous commitments. PCMD employees were
intentionally excluded to assure that no convlict of interest could arise. However
we would like to acknowledge the support and cooperation the Task Force
received from PCMD in the initial information gathering stages of the study.
Some of the members of the Task Force worked full-time on this study and
others contributed on a part-time basis as required.
A study of the Agency's contracts management processes requires a great deal
of information gathering. The Task Force decided to use a variety of survey,
personal interviewing and group discussion techniques in order to get as much
information as possible. A determination was also made to focus the study on
headquarters personnel from three different media: OSWER, OPTS and OW.
This selection was made after discussion with PCMD and it was determined that
these media comprise the greatest amount of contract dollars with the exception
of ORD. ORD was excluded because another study was already underway.
The study process began with the identification of contracts managers by
matching two data bases: 1) the Project Officer Records System (PORS) and 2)
the EPA payroll system (EPAYS). All headquarters contracts managers in the
three media offices were then sent survey questionnaires. This database match
was also used to identify headquarters contracts managers for participation in a
series of focus group sessions and to prolile all the contracts managers in the
Agency.
With these initiatives underway, the 1'ask Force began the process of
interviewing senior managers (DAAs, Offico Directors, Division Directors) to get
-------
a view of the overall environment in which the contracts managers work. It
concluded the data gathering phase of the study with a series of focus group
sessions with PCMD and RIP personnel and POs and WAMs from the three
media offices.
Having gathered considerable information from senior managers, project
officers, work assignment managers, program officials and contracts
professionals, the analysis phase of the study was begun. This report is the
outcome of that analysis.
8
-------
Budget Discussion
To better understand the universe of contracts management at the EPA, the
Task Force reviewed summary budget data for the years FY 81 to FY 87. Since
/
there were no actual year end figures for FY 88, we decided to use FY 87
actuals for the purpose of this study.
In FY 81, EPA obligated more than $361 million dollars in contracts. In FY 87
that figure had increased 177 % to a grand total of over $1 billion. This is an
incredible growth over the past seven years. Based on last year's figures, we
can see that Program Contracts increased 278%, while Other Contract Services
increased 68%, and ADP Contracts grew by 108%. The only contracts category
to remain stable was the R&D category which shows no growth over this period.
This 177% growth in contracts dollars takes, on perspective when compared to
the overall Agency budget which grew by approximately 100% during the same
period. And while contracts were skyrocketing, EPA FTE strength grew by only
5%. So we can easily see that contracts dollars are far surpassing growth in
FTE for the period FY81 to FY87.
In addition, contract dollars represent 54 % of the EPA Operating Plan without
construction grants included and an impressive 31 % when construction grants
are included. The Agency is highly leveraged to say the least and extramural
resources are climbing rapidly at the same time that in-house FTE to manage
these contracts are barely inching upwards. The graphs on the following pages
reflect the statistics described above.
-------
Contract Growth EPA-Wide Has
Far Surpassed FTE Growth FY 81-87
200-1
150
S
u
•
o
100-
50
f t t f f t f ft
• / f ' x t r t /(
x v'\ \ \ x x'x x
ttftrttft.
\\s\x\\\s
ttrtttttt,
/ /
\ %
Contract $
FTE
10
-------
EPA IS HIGHLY LEVERAGED
FY1988 Operating Plan
(excluding Construction Grants)
26.00%
Intramural
54.00%
Extramural
FY 1988 Operating Plan
(including Construction Grants)
16.00%
Intramural
31.00%
VtSrantsViA&a ^vXv^V
mural
53.00%
11
-------
Profiling the Contracts Management Official
The Process
One of the first assignments the Task Force undertook was to ascertain as much
information as it could about the demographic make-up of the contracts
managers in the program offices. To accomplish this, the Task Force searched
for existing databases of contracts management personnel and demographic
data about EPA personnel in general. Two databases were located that
contained the necessary information, but these were not integrated or
compatible systems. The Project Officer Records System (PORS) is maintained
by the Procurement and Contracts Management Division (PCMD) as a running
list of all EPA staff who have taken the Project Officer and Contracts
Administration courses, and the EPA Personnel Payroll System (EPAYS) is the
Agency's official database maintained by the Office of Human Resources
Management (OHRM).
With the help of OHRM and PCMD computer staff, the PORS database was
converted to a generic file and a match was run against the EPAYS to
determine the number of records on PORS that are still active in EPAYS. There
were 4,500 records in PORS; when run against EPAYS there was an initial hit
of just over 3,000. Further assessment by OHRM showed that many of the
records did not match due to differing names (i.e. Bob instead of Robert). A
manual cross-referencing has now produced 3,371 names; extrapolation
suggests that approximately 4,000 names will be matched eventually. While the
4,000 number may not be all inclusive, it is the most accurate number of trained,
active contract managers (i.e. Work Assignment Managers, Delivery Order
Project Officers, Project Officers etc.) in the Agency at this time.
A secondary benefit of this process has been that there is now a way for OHRM
to capture training data from PORS, and PCMD can now derive an accurate
accounting of active, trained contracts management personnel through EPAYS.
At this point it is possible for PCMD to use EPAYS as its main tracking vehicle
instead of PORS, allowing shared data between PCMD, OHRM and other
12
-------
offices that require such information. Officials of PCMD are exploring these
possibilities with OHRM presently.
The Profile
A big slice of the pie I
The first important finding of this profile is that of the more than 12,479
professional and administrative employees at EPA (including employees at
Headquarters, in the Labs and in the Regions), at least 4,000 or 32% are
involved directly in contracts management in support of the Agency's program
responsibilities (see Chart #1). This is a sizeable portion of EPA resources and
does not include employees indirectly involved with contract management -
Agency managers and supervisors, PCMD personnel, financial management
personnel, senior policy makers etc. If we were to add in all these individuals as
well, at least one-half of the Agency's professional and administrative
employees are involved in contracts management.
Based on survey responses (see Survey) and line manager interviews which
show that the average contracts management staffer spends between 10% and
25% of his/her time on this function, this function could represent between 400
and 1,000 work years annually in direct resources. Viewed in perspective, more
workyears are devoted to this function than to most Divisions and Offices in
EPA. Certainly this function must be viewed as extremely important from the
standpoint of resources alone, not to mention the overall contract dollars that
are being managed and the potential for abuse.
Who Is the typical contracts management staffer at the EPA ?
The contracts management (CM) staffer is in a professional or administrative
position (see Chan #2) and is graded at an 11 or above. Most are graded above
the 13 level (see Chart #3). He/she has served in the federal government 12.7
years and has been at EPA 9.5 years (see Charts #4 & 5). The average CM
staffer is 40.7 years old (see Chart #6) and holds a post-bachelors degree (see
Chart #8). Predominantly they hold degrees in the physical sciences (see Chart
#9).
13
-------
Compared to Agency personnel overall, the CM staffer is older (40.7 yrs.. vs.
38.8 yrs.), better educated (masters or equivalent vs. bachelors), higher graded
(13 & above vs. 12 & below) and has been with the federal government (12.7
yrs. vs. 10.7 yrs.) and the EPA (9.5 yrs. vs. 7.4 yrs.) for a longer period of time.
Myth versus reality .
When the Task Force began its study into the contracts management process
and its people, it was told time and again that EPA's contracts managers were
very junior and had little EPA experience. As this profile shows, this is a myth. In
general, contracts managers are just the opposite although we realize that On
Scene Coordinators in the Superfund program tend to be newer employees
and we also recognize that retention of these particular employees is a problem
for the Regions.
EPA Is devoting important resources to contracts management
The good news is that after profiling the contracts management staff, we can say
that EPA has placed its extramural resources in the hands of senior
professionals. This section shows that in fact senior management is taking
contracting seriously.
Contracts managers need a balance of skills.
This section also shows that while contracts managers are at a high level, their
educational background is solidly in the physical sciences and not in
administrative areas. Contracts managers need to have technical knowledge,
but they spend much of their time doing administrative functions such as
accounting, reporting etc. Management training and people skills are not
evident in their backgrounds but are absolutely necessary for effective
administration of contracts.
This information has not only helped us to identify the characteristics of the CM
staffer but has also allowed us to dispel the much held myth in EPA that the CM
staffer is very junior and lacks the requisite time with the Agency. This data
shows that the average CM staffer is more senior than the average EPA
employee and in fact, EPA appears to be putting more experienced, more
responsible people in charge of its contracts and overseeing its major
extramural budgets.
14
-------
I
Contracts Managers Comprise 32% of
EPA's Professional & Administrative Staff
Direct Resources
Indirect Resources
15
L
-------
9
O.
Contract Managers Are More Highly
Graded Than Their EPA Counterparts
50
40-
30-
20-
10-
All EPA
CM Staff
13 plus
9-12
Grade
6 or toss
Contract Managers Are Professional
Or Administrative Employees
Other 4%
Administrative 31%
16
-------
•
w
•
Contracts Managers Have More Government
Service Than Their I-PA Counterparts
All EPA CM StaH
And Have Also Been With EPA Longer
All EPA CM Staff
17
-------
Contracts Managers Are Older Than
Their EPA Counterparts
All EPA
CM Staff
18
-------
Contracts Manager Are More Highly
Educated Than Their EPA Counterparts
20
I 10-1
S
S
14
12
12 - Bachelors Degree
14 • Masters Degree Phis
All EPA
CM Staff
Contracts Managers Tend To Hold
Degrees In The Physical Sciences
Social
19
-------
Survey Analysis
On June 16, 1988, the Task Force sent a written survey instrument to 805
headquarters contracts management personnel in OSWER, OPTS and OW. The
process used to identify the addressees was the same as described in the
•
Profile section of this report. We received 412 responses for a return rate of
51.2%. 392 of those responses, or 48.7% of the surveys sent, were used for the
purpose of this analysis. Demographic results were compared with the profile
data presented previously. The similarity of results indicates that the responses
should be considered a valid sampling.
,»
The survey instrument consisted of 54 multiple choice questions and space for
additional comment. The topics covered included demographics, training,
performance evaluation, size of contracts monitored, supervisory support and
relations with PCMD. A copy of the survey with overall tabulated results is
provided in Appendix A.
Analysis of the results was conducted using several factors to differentiate the
data. Data were tabulated by job (POs and WAMs), by office, by job and office
(OSWER POs, OPTS WAMs etc.), and by size of contract administered. The
pages that follow are graphic representations of some of the more important
results of the survey. One question asked for specific areas where respondents
desired more training; the results of that question are included in Appendix B.
The fact that we received such a good response to a survey distributed by
unsolicited mailing, with no follow-up to encourage response, indicates to us
that POs and WAMs are concerned about the way EPA manages its contracts.
The Task Force would like to thank those who took the time to fill out the survey
and thereby assisted us in this effort.
20
-------
GRADE LEVEL OF RESPONDENTS ...
is
15
21
-------
ERA'S CONTRACTS MANAGERS ARE EXPERIENCED
X of Respondents
< 6 mos.
6 mos. to 1 yr. 1-2 yn. 2-3 yrs.
length of Federal Service
X of Respondents
< 6 mos.
6 mos. to 1 yr. 1-2 yrs.
length of EPA Service
2-5 yrs.
> 5yr>.
> 5 yrs.
... MOST HAVE OVER 2 YEARS CM EXPERIENCE
Overall
POs
Overall
POs
WAMs
X of Respondents
50
40 g-
< 1 yr.
1 -2 yrs. 2-3 yrs. 3-5 yrs.
Contracts Management Experience
22
> S yrs.
IVV1 POs
\///7\ WAMS
-------
TRAINING COURSES RATISD HELPFUL
BASIC PROJECT OFFICER COURSE
Owrall
FOB
EZ)
CrtrwruMy
Vary MtfofiJ Not vwy Net at all
Rating
CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION COURSE
6rtr»m*y Vtry
Otwralt
P0«
WAMl
Not v»ry Not at all
Rating
23
-------
MOST FELT THEIR TRAINING WAS ADEQUATE
MANY WOULD LIKE MORE...
NO
Cnougn mining to fufli you contract*
ESPECIALLY POs...
AND OSWER.
Would you lik*
Would you fik> rnora
24
-------
MOST DIDN'T KNOW IF...
THEY HAD BEEN DESIGNATED...
Yes No Don't Know
Been designated to contract position by PCMO?
OR IF THEIR WORKLOAD WAS WITHIN THE STANDARDS
X of Respondents
Yes No Don't Know
to your workload within PCMO standards?
25
-------
MOST HAVE CONTRACTS MANAGEMENT IN PDs AND PMS ...
OWMI
YM Mo Dent Know
i PMlllon OvKrtptTon bMn orrwid«r»
No
Contract! IneludM In p«rtormonc« rating?
BUT 30-40% FEEL THEY DON'T RECEIVE ENOUGH CREDIT
of Respondents
Y«3
Do you f««l you get enough credit for contracts?
-------
TIME SPENT AND WEIGHT GIVEN IN PERFORMANCE EVALUATION
SEEM TO MATCH CLOSELY
"Time Spent
None 3-1 OX H-2SX 26-4OJC 41-60X 61-7SX > 7SX Don't Know
All Respondents
Time Spent
Weight Given
None 5-10% 11-25X26-40X41-60X61-7535 > 75XOon't Know
Project Officers
Time Spent
Weight Given
None 5-10% 11-25%26-40?541-60%i51-75% > 755Don't Know
Work Assignment Managers
27
-------
OSWER POs MONITOR THE LARGEST CONTRACTS...
.1 - .15 .IS - .5 .5-1 1 - « 6-25 25-50
Walue of contracts monitored (I 000.000)
> 50
AND OVERSEE THE MOST WAMs.
Z of Respondents
None 1-3 4-6 7-10 11-20 21-40
Number of WAMs working on PO» controcts
41-80
28
-------
FEW POs IN OSWER ARE SUPERVISORS...
9K Of
(Picjtel Ofli;m arty)
.THE ONES THAT ARE HAVE NOT HAD SUPERVISORY TRAINING..
X of ftnpen4««U
...AND THEY DO NOT CONTRIBUTE TO THE RATING OF THEIR WAMs.
X af R
Do you oentrtbuu IA VM rottig of yotr
29
-------
ABOUT 40% FEEL THEIR SUPERVISORS ARE
SOMEWHAT TO NOT AT ALL KNOWLEDGABLE
ABOUT CONTRACTS MANAGEMENT...
v%ry KnoiUMoobt* Sotn«v»iat Not Ot O"
to yoor upcrvtoer ivieMcdebM about eamraett? .
AND THIS IS CONSISTENT ACROSS OFFICES.
of R«tpond«lU
Cxtr«n«y V%fy KnevitdgaM* Sem*«hot Not at ai
to yetr iup«fvteor MwwiMobM about eentraet*?
30
-------
MOST ARE SATISFIED WITH HOW OFTEN THEY DISCUSS
CONTRACTS MANAGEMENT WITH THEIR SUPERVISORS
% of Respondents
SO
Present
Ideally
Daily
% of Respondents
Weekly Biweekly Monthly QuorterlyBienniolly Yearly
Overall
Never
Present
Ideally
Daily
Weekly Biweekly Monthly QuorterlyBienniolly Yearly
Project Officers
Never
MonlNy Ougrl«f1y Bwiwttofy rtorly Ntvw
31
-------
MOST WOULD LIKE TO TALK TO THEIR COs MORE OFTEN...
BUT HOW OFTEN VARIES WIDELY AMONG OFFICES.
X of
Prwentty
MMfly
Doi*
BivMMy Monthly Quortarty Bww'olly Ywrty
OSWERPO*
E%% Mwly
twy
KvMWy UonWy Ouortwty Bwnnioty r»orty
OPTS P0«
wot
32
-------
POs GIVE THEIR COs GOOD MARKS.,.
Excellent Very Coed Good Not So Good
tvobote your nela1>on«hip vitti your CO.
Poor
...AND WAMs DO THE SAME FOR THKIR POs.
OSWER WAMs
OPTS WAMs
Woter WAMs
Excellent Very Good Good Not So Good
Evaluate your rctofoflifcip with your PO.
Poor
33
-------
COST ESTIMATES AND MONITORING CONTRACTOR
WORK ARE THE MOST TROUBLESOME TO POs/WAMS.*
X of Respondents
Orofting SOWS Coating Monitoring Hone Other
Whot ospeets of contracts ore most troublesome?
X of Respondents
Drafting SOWs Costing Monitoring None Other
What aspects of contracts are most troublesome?
*For areas specified by those answering "other", see Appendix B.
-------
POs/WAMs IN OSWER HAVE TAKEN REMEDIAL ACTION
AGAINST CONTRACTORS MOST OFTEN.
X of Respondents
Yes
Hove you ever token remedial action?
35
-------
Senior Manager Interviews
In an attempt to get a view of the overall environment of the contracts manager,
the Task Force decided to interview senior managers in the selected media -
OSWER, OPTS and OW. Deputy Assistant Administrators, Office Directors and
Division Directors comprised the targeted audience. A total of 65 managers (3
DAAs, 12 Office Directors, 50 Division Directors) were interviewed over a period
of six weeks by three teams of Task Force members. The team approach was
chosen to assure maximum exposure for Task Force members and to get as
many perspectives as possible to the answers given. To assure consistency
throughout the interview process, an interview guideline was developed (see
Appendix C) and all team members asked similar questions of senior
managers.
The Task Force targeted several areas of interest in its interviewing procedures
attempting to determine the way in which senior managers viewed both the
contracts management process and the contract managers themselves in their
organizations. The contract decision process, the contract manager selection
process, the incentive system for contract managers, the support system within
Offices and Divisions, as well as the personal involvement of senior managers
in the contracts process were all areas of inquiry.
At the outset, we separated media so that we could utilize comparative analysis
to determine differences between media offices. While we found some
differences from Division to Division, we did not come away with a feeling that
those differences were striking. Our interviews led us to believe that in general,
Agency managers view contract management in an homogeneous way.
36
-------
The Findings
The following are the themes and findings that developed from the interviews
with senior managers:
• If It alnt broke, why fix It ?
Most senior managers felt that the contracting process was working well and
expressed the strong opinion that umbrella;, Level of Effort (LOE) contracts (i.e.
contracts where person hours rather than specific products are procured) are
well suited to the unpredictability of EPA programmatic requirements and
should not be curtailed in any way. In addition, all expressed frustration with the
Federal government procurement process, especially with the time that it takes
to award a competitive procurement. Reaction might change if Federal
procurement policy was to be significantly steam lined; but for now, managers
view LOE contracts as the best way to go.
t/ We're not sure what we've got, but It's sure good to have the
extra staff.
Most managers had only passing knowledge of the actual extent of contracting
in their organizations although after some probing, it was found that extramural
budgets usually matched or exceeded intramural budgets. While the
interviewees could discuss in detail their own employees and their activities,
most could not when it came to their contractors. Many managers viewed
contractor employees as supplemental staff members whose presence
compensated for a lack of funding for in-house staff.
t/ Past practice leads to future decisions or we need experts.
The three major reasons given to the Task Force for contracting out in-house
EPA functions were : 1) lack of FTE, 2) lack of specific expertise, and 3)
historical precedent (i.e. the function has always been contracted out in the
past).With regard to the lack of in-house specialized expertise, many managers
expressed the fear that the Agency was over leveraged to the point where in-
house employees could not adequately evaluate contractor end products and
37
-------
deliverables. Interviewees also related that they had given up on the idea of
asking for more FTE, even though it was generally believed that some missions
could be accomplished more efficiently in house.
t/ The farther away, the better I feel.
Most senior managers said they did not involve themselves personally in the
contracts process and that contracts management was delegated to the Branch
or Section level. The exception to this rule came if there was a major contractor
problem, in which case senior managers did get involved. In those cases where
the Division Director was actively and personalty involved, the contracts
managers were more motivated to take the process seriously.
I/ We're Interested In the product, not the process.
Contract managers (POs, WAMs etc.) were overwhelmingly chosen due to their
programmatic responsibilities or technical expertise rather than any contracts
management experience. While most senior managers felt that having
experienced contracts managers was a plus, few addressed this
skill/knowledge when selecting people to do this function. Because contractors
are viewed as such an essential part of completing projects, contract
management duties are assigned as part of an employee's overall job function
and are not viewed as a special distinct area. The role of the contractor in EPA
has become so much a part of the fabric that managing these contracts is
viewed as "other duties as assigned."
I/ We rate on program performance, not procedure.
Most managers did not know if the performance agreements of their contracts
managers had been amended in-line with PCMD guidelines but felt that
managing contracts could be viewed as part of the overall Federal Managers
Financial Integrity Act (FMFIA) standard that was incorporated in all
performance agreements. Senior managers gave little direct weight to contracts
management when rating employees but felt that because contractors played
such an integral role in accomplishing program missions that contracts
managers were rated indirectly for their contracts work when they were rated for
38
-------
their program performance. They also staled that there were already so many
mandatory sections in performance standards that very little weight could be
given to a separate contracts management standard.
It's really Just part of the Job.
Most senior managers viewed contracts management as a collateral duty that
should take up no more than ten percent of an employee's time. There was little
understanding of the time it can/should take a contracts manager to do an
effective job. Little recognition was given to the function itself; It generally was
not viewed as special because contractor work was so much a part of the day-
to-day efforts of the programs.
Training Is a great Idea'but make It useful.
Unanimous support was voiced for training of contracts managers but many felt
that the substance of the existing courses should be redirected and also that the
duration of the courses was too lengthy. Many felt that the coursework should
be more nuts and bolts oriented and less theoretical; more emphasis should
also be placed on the post-award process than the pre-award process.
Managers expressed support for training that was more directed to the type of
work that contractors at EPA do (i.e. don't leach how to buy pencils and paper
when we're actually buying hours). Typos of training suggested included:
accounting, cost estimating, developing clear and precise work assignment
write-ups, and the general principles of managing contractors on a day-to-day
basis.
I/ We need more Agency training resources .
Senior managers also voiced the concern that it was difficult to get their people
trained because there were so few available courses and course offerings.
Along this same line, concerns were also voiced about the timeliness of training
notifications; it frequently takes a very long time to find out who is being
accepted into the course and this makes planning very difficult . Managers
were also uneasy about the practice of waiving training for certification due to
39
-------
insufficient course offerings. Although sometimes a necessary evil, they feel it is
a vulnerability.
t/ Central management no, central coordination yes I
Managers did not feel that central organizational structures devoted to contracts
management (whether at the DAA, Office or Division Director level) were as
important to achieving effective contracts management as central coordination
of contracting activities. Several managers said they could not get along without
their "extramural coordinators* who coordinate contracting budgets, act as a
go-between with PCMD and the programs, and provide technical assistance
and direction to project officers and work assignment managers,.
Tracking down the numbers is helpful and can be crucial.
Very few standardized, automated tracking/project management systems exist
in the Agency, although many individual project officers and work assignment
managers have developed their own systems on their own PCs. Senior
managers were most concerned with budgetary tracking since many problems
arise when contractors run out of funds prior to the end of the fiscal year.
Standard systems would be helpful for accountability.
40
-------
The Focus Groups
To get the largest segment of opinion possible from the target population, EPA's
contracts managers, the Task Force decided to hold focus group sessions
rather than attempt individual interviews. Nine sessions were held with a
representative sample of contracts managers: work assignment managers and
project officers from the three target media. Two sessions were also held with
contracting officers and management official:; from PCMD; and one session was
held with RTP contracting and financial management officials. A total of
approximately 175 contracts managers participated in the focus groups. All
sessions were staffed by a trained facilitator, a recorder and an observer.
All focus group participants were lead through a process called "1-3-6." The 1-
3-6 process consists of having individuals write out their thoughts on paper and
then band together into larger groups and roport out the consolidated ideas on
subjects discussed. The three questions asked were: 1) What's working for you
in the contracts management process? , 2) What's not working ? and 3) What
are your recommendations for improvements?
The following pages represent a compilation of the outcome of the focus group
sessions. These are not all the raw data but they represent themes that were
repeated over and over from the sessions. It should be noted that the comments
received from PCMD were very similar to those received from the program
contracts managers.
41
-------
What's Working ?
• PCMD's initiative to sponsor project officer and contracts administration
training is positive.
• Clear communications usually take place between contracting officers
and contracts managers.
• Relationship between project officers and work assignment managers is
very good.
* Overall, the Agency exhibits a great deal of integrity in its contracting.
• Contractor deliverables are being reviewed and inspected.
• The contracts divisions in Headquarters, RTP and Cincinnati are viewed
as generally supportive of the programs.
• Many project officers bring concerns to contract officers before they
become problems.
• There is strong management emphasis on contracts management in
some organizations.
• Work assignments are approved quickly by contracting officers.
* Award fee contracts lead to more quality assurance.
* The flexibility presently afforded in many contract vehicles (i.e. level of
effort contracts) is viewed as meeting the environmental mission of the
program offices.
42
-------
What's Not Working ?
• Senior agency managers do not emphasize contract management to
the degree they should.
• Current training is too theoretical, needs to cover real-world activities.
• Poorly drafted statements of work lend to problems for contracts
managers.
• Little incentive exists in the Agency lor good contracts management
work.
* Contracts management tends to be dumped on poor performers.
• Performance standards for contracts management vary from division to
division.
» Management skills (i.e. people skills, administrative abilities) are not
emphasized enough in.the selection of contracts managers.
* Often, progress reports don't accompany invoices.
• Follow-up training is not provided to project officers and work
assignment managers.
• In many cases, contracts management is not currently included in job
announcements where it is part of the job function.
• Agency managers and supervisors are generally not well schooled in
contracting procedures.
43
-------
* The project officer manual is too technical, not up-to-date and not
indexed.
• No standard PC based software exists for contracts managers to use for
project tracking and budgeting.
• No Agency forums exist for cross fertilization of ideas among contracts
managers.
•
• Too many poor performing contractors receive awards repeatedly.
• WAMs/POs need assistance in estimating the costs associated with
their work assignments.
• WAMs who lack necessary technical knowledge cannot evaluate
contractor products.
«Invoices are often "rubber stamped."
* There is on-going pressure from senior managers to bend the Federal
procurement rules.
• The EPA accounting system is overly burdensome due to the use of
many account numbers.
* In some cases we have unqualified contractors working for
inexperienced WAMs.
• Geographic distances between HO, RTP and Cincinnati can be a
problem.
• POs find it difficult to approve invoices in 5 calendar days; causes
pressure to approve without checking.
• Difficult to evaluate experience levels of contractor personnel.
44
-------
• Often, little differentiation exists between contractor employees and EPA
staff.
* POs are often not suited to the job; didn't come to EPA to become
contracts administrators.
• Many vendors are allowed to overrun work assignment hours.
• Work assignments need to be tightened with regard to tasking
assignments, labor hour requirements etc.
* There is no central database of work assignments.
• WAMs/POs feel uncomfortable enforcing contract provisions due to lack
of knowledge and management support.
Suggested Improvements
• Require training on a regular basis, i.e. refresher courses.
• Change more contract vehicles to fixod price, as "level of efforts" are too
difficult to manage.
• Improve procurement planning process in the program offices so
statements of work are better written.
• Develop and circulate PC based generic software for contracts
managers.
• Emphasize and strengthen the roles of POs and WAMs in the program
offices.
45
-------
• Include project tracking, cost estimation, managing contractors,
negotiating with contractor etc. in the training courses.
* Institutionalize contracts management by evaluating POs and WAMs on
their management skills, not just their program mission responsibilities.
Also evaluate supervisors re: same.
• Establish mentoring programs for POs and WAMs.
• Establish a standing Task Force of PCMD and contracts managers to
simplify the procurement process.
• Redo the contracts manual bringing it up-to-date and indexing it.
• Simplify the accounting process.
• Establish a quarterly PCMD newsletter geared toward discussion of
timely contracts management issues.
* Reduce procurement lead times.
• Create a vendor performance database and a database of work
assignments.
• If possible, hire more qualified EPA personnel rather than just
increasing contract dollars.
• Set up face-to-face meetings between contracts managers, contractors
and contracting officers.
• Give rewards for excellence in contracts management.
• Develop a career track for POs.
46
-------
Findings & Recommendations
General
The state of contracts management In the program offices Is
generally adequate, but should be strengthened.
On the one hand, the majority of managers wo interviewed seem satisfied with
the contracting process and the products they receive from contractors. Project
Officers and Work Assignment Managers are highly graded and experienced,
with over 70% having 5 or more years of Federal service. There is a general
consensus that the Agency has come a long way since the Dinged report of
1985. Finally, there were no indications from managers, POs or WAMs of
widespread waste, fraud, or abuse. However, many at all levels expressed
concern that the extent of contracting made the Agency vulnerable to a loss of
expertise; managers at the mid to senior level were generally not involved at all
with contracts management; and some fear that an overdependency on
contractors could open up opportunities for collusion, contracting for personal
services and directed subcontracting.
EPA Is highly leveraged; contracts management Is
Inseparable from the successful completion of our mission.
At least one-half of the Agency's professional and administrative staff is
involved in some way with contracts management. Most managers we
interviewed indicated that at least half their budget is extramural, in many ways,
the Agency has not recognized that its employees are often essentially contract
managers, and that administrative and management skills are needed to
operate in this environment in addition to requisite scientific competencies.
The move In the late 70's to level of effort and cost plus
contracting shifted the responsibility for contracts management to
the program offices.
47
-------
While managers generally like the flexibility of these contract vehicles, some
recognize the inherent difficulties in managing them. Additionally, these types
of contracts have changed the role of the Project Officer from project manager to
administrative business manager, and made the Work Assignment Managers
the true technical representatives. Again, the Agency has been slow to
recognize that different skills are needed to fulfill these changing roles.
The proportion of contracting will Increase without a similar
Increase In FTE.
When asked why they contract out, nearly every manager we interviewed said it
was because they get more work, more money, but no more FTE. In a real
sense, EPA decides to contract out by momentum and historical precedent;
managers do not even think of asking for FTE. Rather than planning for
procurements, many offices contract out a function because it has always been
contracted out. Cost efficiency and productivity are rarely considered, though
many suspect that at times they would get better, less expensive work using in-
house resources if they were available. All study participants saw this trend
continuing into the future.
Management Awareness
Findings
The degree of management Interest, knowledge, and support
of good contracts management varies widely, but generally Is not
high.
While there are important exceptions, notably in OSWER, few managers we
interviewed, especially from the division level up, had any personal
involvement with the contracts process. A definite output orientation exists
among EPA managers with little interest shown for management processes.
Managers indicated that they only get involved in the contracts process when
there are problems. Many managers we interviewed viewed contractors almost
as extensions of their staff. This attitude seems to largely be a result of the way
EPA decides to contract out a function; to make up for FTE shortages rather than
to obtain a product more efficiently
48
-------
The Agency does not recognize the resources required for
contracts management In Its budget and planning processes.
Most managers did not feel that the Agency's budget and planning processes
put enough priority on providing adequate contracts management resources in
the program offices. As a result, these resources were often hidden and
underfunded. Many managers felt that they stood a greater chance of receiving
additional resources by tying their needs to programmatic and legislative
mandates, rather than administrative requirements.
There Is a general perception among POs and WAMs of
Insufficient management support.
Where interest and support is at a high level, il: makes a perceptible difference
to the way POs and WAMs view their jobs. An understanding and willingness
on higher management's part to recognize the restraints imposed by
regulations and by sound contracts management practice is lacking in most
organizations.
Nearly all POs, most WAMs, but few managers have stand-
alone contracts management elements In their performance
agreements.
Most managers from the branch level up have generic resources management
and FMFIA standards that include contracts management and were generally
weighted at 10-15%. Few have stand-alone standards. While most POs are
evaluated on their contract work, a significant number felt they do not receive
enough credit for it. WAMs seemed to be generally pleased with the degree of
emphasis given to contracts management in their performance reviews and
believe that the product, not the process, is most important in their performance.
Recommendations
*^ The Administrator should Issue an EPA Order on sound
contracts management, make contracts management one of his
49
-------
management themes, and require higher management to be
personally Involved throughout the process.
Sound contracts management is as important to EPA's mission as is better
science, risk based management, and technology transfer, and the Agency's
management consciousness of this must be raised. So much of the mission
that EPA carries out is performed by contractors, that good contracts
management is integral to the Agency's mission of protecting the environment.
To raise senior management's sensitivity to this issue, we recommend
developing a new EPA Order that would define EPA's contracts management
policy, set out the roles and responsibilities of various officials in the post award
contracting process, outline the key elements which contribute to good
contracts management in an organization, and emphasize the Administrator's
strong views regarding prohibited contracting practices. A separate letter from
the Administrator to the AAs on these topics would also go a long way toward
communicating this message.
Adherence to sound contracts management should be made a
part of SPMS.
As a means of enhancing accountability, contracts management topics should
be added to the agenda for the Deputy Administrator's quarterly SPMS
meetings with senior program officials. This would be an effective way of
emphasizing the importance of the subject to senior agency managers and also
help redress problems as they arise.
Senior managers should be required to submit an annual
procurement planning and contracts management Improvement
plan for their organization.
This plan would encourage managers to plan how they intend to achieve a
model contracts management environment in their organizations. It would also
become a basis for the SPMS discussions with the Deputy Administrator. A
guideline for the plan would be the suggested "model" embodied in this report.
"3P The Agency should recognize the resources required to
manage contracts In the budget and planning processes, and the
administrative skills needed when recruiting its contract managers.
50
-------
If managers can ask for and receive resources specifically for contract
management, they are more likely to value that function. The Agency can
demonstrate its seriousness in promoting sound contract management by
getting those resources for its managers. EPA should also make ft clear that
managerial, as well as technical skills are needed to direct the work of
contractors and they should gear their recruitment planning to those skills.
"* Managers should be certified in order to supervise POs and
WAMs.
The one day seminar now offered by the EPA Institute should be required of all
new managers and supervisors up to the DAA level. The purpose of the
seminar is to sensitize supervisors and managers to the regulations and ethical
restraints that they must operate under with regard to contracting, and to help
them appreciate the workload, demands and complexities faced by their POs
and WAMs. The seminar also teaches them how to talk to their subordinates
about contract management and how to instill good management practices in
their offices.
A standard contract management element should be placed
In the performance agreements of any manager whose organization
makes use of contracting.
Specific criteria should be included such as: active involvement by managers
from the pre-award and throughout the administration phase of each contract,
quality assurance reviews, efficient resource tracking and organization etc. The
weight given to the standard should be significant enough to make it important
and could vary depending upon the amount of contracting activity in a particular
organization.
51
-------
Career Development of Contracts Managers
Findings
The required training Is needed and useful, but Is In need of
redirection.
POs and WAMs were nearly unanimous in the view that the training courses
presently offered were too legalistic and taught from a PCMD point of view
rather than a user's point of view. They felt what they needed from the courses
was .a practical, day-to-day, "how-to" course. As one PO put it, "There were
plenty of donts, but too few do's."
The training courses are not held often enough.
Managers complained that they could not get their people into the courses fast
enough. This leads to the "ghost" PO/WAM phenomenon, where a trained PO
or WAM signs off on the papers, but is not actually doing the work. Some
managers felt that waivers of the training requirements were too frequent, even
though in most cases, managers indicated they were requesting the waivers
out of necessity. Frequent waivers raise questions about management's overall
commitment to the certification process. Resources are insufficient to train all the
people who need training.
Specific training Is needed for Work Assignment Managers.
WAMs also complained that the present training courses, which are geared to
POs, are largely irrelevant to their day-to-day activities. Many WAMs are dealing
with business people (the contractors) for the first time. Because they are the
technical experts and the ones responsible for the completion of each task,
contracts management becomes a subset of project management for WAMs.
They largely recognize this and want to know how to acquire the proper skills.
Program offices have begun developing their own training courses for WAMs;
OERR has a course in place, and OSW is planning to modify it for their use.
While PCMD has provided a contracts administration course, WAMs feel that
more hands-on training is necessary.
ft Certification of Project Officers Is an important factor In
professionalizing their role.
52
-------
Certification attesting to special knowledge and abilities was viewed positively
by POs and management alike. Most POs would like to see refresher courses
offered and a required recertification process put in place.
Recommendations
*® The existing training courses need to be reviewed, and the
curriculum redesigned.
Course redesign should be carried out with all the various players involved
(POs, WAMs, PCMD, FMD, OHRM), but led by OHRM because they are the
experts in course design and learning technique. Besides the legal, ethical and
technical issues, the course(s) should cover people skills, financial issues,
project management, and cost estimation. In short, the training must address
the skills needed by POs/WAMs in their changed roles. It might also include
ideas/checklists for supervisors and POs/WAMs to self-assess whether they're
doing a good job. OHRM should pursue ways to use hands-on managers as
course instructors and find ways to sponsor frequent training under the EPA
Institute. This review and redesign should also include the Project Officer
Manual and should consider the need for other hands-on guides and checklists.
"®" The Agency must devote the resources necessary to hold the
course often enough so that all who need the training can get It
within a reasonable period of time.
Neither PCMD nor OHRM currently has the resources to provide adequate
training often enough. Action must be taken to locate funding to reduce the
current training backlog and to plan for an ongoing training program which will
carry us into the future. Planners should project approximately 2000 trainees
per year and should frame the funding strategy within the context of the revised
training curriculum. Reasonable time should t>e defined as prior to designation
or no later than 60 days after designation as a PO or WAM.
53
-------
•** PCMD should enforce the certification process and add a
recertlficatlon requirement.
As it stands, PCMD's training deadlines and workload standards for POs are
largely artificial. It appears that the current December 31st training deadline for
POs and WAMs will have to be extended or many contracts managers will have
to be decertified. If the program offices are to take these seriously, they must be
realistic and enforceable. It was also the feeling of the Task Force, interviewees
and PCMD that contracts managers should be recertified after several years
on the job to renew their skills and keep pace with the everchanging rules and
guidelines in the Federal contracting arena. PCMD should take the lead in
designing and enforcing a viable certification/recertification program; and line
program managers should be held accountable for complying.
I®* New courses should be Instituted.
OHRM and PCMD should review the WAM course now being given in OERR,
and evaluate its adaptability for the rest of the Agency. Additional refresher
courses aimed at POs and/or WAMs, perhaps addressing a particular topic in a
seminar format, should also be developed.
B^* The establishment of mentoring programs should be
encouraged In the program offices.
The teaming of new POs/WAMs with experienced ones not only gives the
newcomers practical experience, but also recognizes the mentor as an
experienced and valued member of the organization.
Support Systems
Findings
Access to central data systems (Including feedback on
contractor performance) and a simple, standardized PC-based
54
-------
financial and workload tracking system were frequently requested
by POs and WAMs.
Contracts managers consistently requested access to central databases that
contained information on past contractor performance and a listing of Agency-
wide work assignments. Lack of such databases causes concern about the
potential for utilizing poor performing contractors and duplicate efforts by
various organizations.
PCMD Is communicating with the program offices, but on an
ad hoc, as needed basis.
Although Project Officers are in fairly regular contact with their Contracting
Officers, the bulk of communication between PCMD and the programs appears
to come during the pre-award phase, rather than the post-award management
process. Some POs/WAMs felt that they were not hearing from PCMD what
they needed to know (i.e., how to avoid poor performers, take corrective actions,
etc.). Many POs and managers expressed frustration with inconsistent and
conflicting information from different COs.
ft Infra-program office communication on contracts management
Is lacking, making POs feel Isolated.
POs in particular would like to have more contact and opportunities to interact
with their counterparts, either in other areas of their own offices or Agency-wide.
WAMs also expressed a desire to learn from their colleagues on topics where
their POs couldn't help (i.e., costing a task, day-to-day monitoring of
contractors).
A central ombudsman or contracts expert In the program
offices helps.
The burden for improving communications is net only on PCMD's shoulders. A
central point of contact in the program offices for disseminating information and
assisting POs/WAMs with particular problems, where it has been established
(such as OERR, or divisions in OPTS and OW), has made a difference. Such a
central point could also help with monitoring contract activities for senior
managers.
55
-------
Many contract managers an unaware or unable to deal with
poor performance from a contractor.
This is largely due to a lack of information and understanding of the technical
and legal aspects of the procurement process. While many contracts managers
said they would like to take remedial action against problem contractors, they
did not know how or felt that they needed added support.
Recommendations
*® Access to central Information systems should be widespread
as soon as possible.
The pilot program to allow POs read-only access to the Contracts Payment
System should be moved along as quickly as possible. PCMD's efforts to
upgrade its contractor evaluation system should be encouraged and supported
so that information can be shared with contracts managers in the program
offices. PCMD and OIRM should work with POs and WAMs to develop and
disseminate such things as PC project/financial tracking systems and "canned"
file structures. Access to PCMD contracts processes and contract status is also
needed. To promote management awareness and force accountability, senior
managers should have access to a wide range of information about contracts
management in their office. The current ADP requirements analysts being
conducted by OA to determine user/PCMD needs should be supported. This
needs analysis should form the basis for designing an integrated contracts
management information system.
$& Contractors should be required to certify that they are not
performing duplicate work assignments.
The use of a self-certification by contractors would help to eliminate the
possibility of duplication between organizations. This self-certification by the
vendor could become a required part of the overall contract document but
would have to be exercised prior to the beginning of each work assignment.
Such an action should be pursued with OGC.
56
-------
IE® PCMD and OGC should run ir demonstration project on
corrective action.
PCMD and OGC should select several contracts managers who are having
difficulty with poor contractor performance and work directly with them to take
remedial action against these vendors. This demonstration would show
management support for adverse action when appropriate and would let all
contracts management staff know that such action is possible and that PCMD is
ready, willing and able to help.
B^ PCMD should review and strengthen both external and
Internal communications.
PCMD needs to notify contracts managers in the program offices of changes in
FAR, regulations, guidance, and policy in a timely and consistent manner. A
regular printed vehicle, like a newsletter, devoted to contract management is
one possibility; the seminars suggested in the career development section
above are another; and yet another is an E-Mail bulletin board. A PCMD hotline
may also be a real help to the client. The first step is for PCMD and the program
offices to develop an accurate and up-to-date database of exactly who the POs
and WAMs are in the program offices.
I®" The establishment of Interest or user groups among
POs/WAMs, either at the Agency or the Office level, would help end
the feeling of Isolation and allow for cross fertilization of Ideas.
After the focus groups held by the Task Force, several POs told us that simply
sitting in the same room with other POs and discussing their common problems
and trading ideas was helpful to them. This concept would allow for experience
sharing and the development of a corporate body of knowledge. These groups
would also help to professionalize the job of Project Officer, and they might
even be tasked to represent POs in new initiatives like redesigning the training
curriculum or developing new data systems. Activities that allow POs to
influence contracts management initiatives will help to foster ownership for their
profession.
57
-------
•fc® The establishment of a central contracts ombudsman or
contracts coordinator at the Office Director level should be
encouraged throughout the Agency.
Such a position (or organizational unit) would serve as a central technical
assistant and clearinghouse of information. Such a coordinator could serve
other functions as well, like financial tracking and providing information to
program management. The actual structure should be left to each Office
Director to allow for maximum flexibility.
Organizational Arrangements
Findings
The contracts management function Is generally located at the
branch level or below, with most POs/WAMs reporting to section
chiefs.
This type of arrangement has evolved from the Agency's decision to make wide
use of level of effort contracting. Because the government is buying hours with
this type of contract, the management function has moved from the central
contracting office (PCMD) to the program offices where users of those hours
direct the work. The management function is now highly decentralized and the
burden is much more on the POs and WAMs.
Few centralized oversight units exist, especially above the
branch level.
These units do seem to help where they exist, if only as an indication of
involvement by the Office or Division Director. In those cases where central
units or individuals were found, the organizational head felt strongly about
maintaining the function, and contracts managers felt that the office head was
concerned and aware of their responsibilities.
58
-------
Most POs/WAMs are not supervisors, and POs especially are
often seen as peripheral players In thelf organizations.
Contracts management is not viewed as a path towards advancement in this
technically oriented agency. Awards and rewards for good contract
management are rare, and the risks of bad contract management are many.
POs are not being motivated to perform in an outstanding manner in this
function; if anything their motivation is to move paper quickly and get the
product out. One PO described this attitude as the "administrative stigma.*
WAMs, with their more technical backgrounds, tend not to be prepared for, and
generally dislike, the administrative work of contract management.
Recommendations
!®" Management of contracts must ami should remain at the level
where the work Is performed.
There is no alternative with the contract vehicles now in use. Program tasks
should remain with the officials in charge of a certain mission.
"®" Program offices should consider setting up contracts
management units at the Office Director level.
We make no recommendation as to the structure of such an entity to allow for
maximum management flexibility. We do, however, recommend that at least one
full-time person be assigned to this responsibility.
E^3 The Agency must encourage the professionalizatlon and
recognition of the Project Officer function.
While contract administration is difficult to sell as an exciting job, it is a usable
;
skill and a very important one. It should certainly not be a barrier to
advancement, especially given the fact that much of EPA's work is carried out
through contracts. Line managers must be made aware of the importance the
Agency places on this function and be encouraged to reward good work by
their staff. OARM should also find ways to recognize excellence in contract
management in the program offices.
59
-------
A Model for Sound Contracts Management
In this section, the Task Force will discuss some of the factors that we saw as
positive in promoting good contracts management in the program offices. None
of these factors are exclusive or pervasive in any single office that we studied;
some were present in .different guises in different places. We do not wish to
suggest that every office in EPA should adopt all of these items, but certainly
there should be a credible attempt in the program offices to institutionalize most
of them.
(&» Managerial Involvement
Managerial involvement in the contracts management process is crucial to
promoting good practice. If managers are aware of the importance that contracts
play in the accomplishment of their objectives, and demonstrate to their
subordinates that they understand the process, they make a tremendous
difference in the work lives of POs and WAMs. When contracts managers feel
confident that their supervisors will understand and support good decisions,
they can be more effective in their duties.
Managers who take an active interest in contracts management demonstrate it
by keeping track of developments under their contracts. They often meet with
POs, WAMs, PCMD and their contractors, beyond just chairing performance
evaluations boards ( although the PEBs are a positive step). They provide POs
and WAMs with the administrative information and technical assistance that
they need. Most importantly, they provide clear direction to their contracts
managers.
The quality managers that we encountered try to "sell" contracts management
as a useful skill, one that helps an individual develop managerial potential.
They make their contracts managers feel like important members of the
organization and reward them for good work in managing contracts specifically.
60
-------
Recognition That Administrative Skills Are Needed.
The best, most professional POs and WAMs that we encountered are good
administrators and managers. They had developed these skills either through
education or experience. They are aware of
-------
-------
The
Appendix
-------
-------
Appendix A
Survey Tabulation
-------
-------
QUESTIONNAIRE FOR PROJECT OFFICERS, DELIVERY ORDER
PROJECT OFFICERS & WORK ASSIGNMENT MANAGERS
We are asking you to complete this survey as part of an overall study of the contracts
management process at the EPA. All answers will be held strictly confidential by the
Management & Organization Division and survey results will only be reported in
summary form. We feel that this information is most important and we ask that
you answer all questions to the best of your knowledge. Where there are multiple
choice answers, please fill in the blank with the appropriate letter. After completion,
return in enclosed envelope to:
Management & Organization Division Attn: Contracts Survey, PM-213
01. Are you a 30%. Project officer (PO) 6% Delivery order project officer (DOPO)
45% Work assignment manager (WAM) 19%. Other, piease
specify
02 Are you presently working with an active contract or assignment ? 64%. yes
16% no
03. Please enter your title and job series.
04. Please list your grade 05. Is this A. GS B. GM c. SES
06. Which organization are you in ?
35%. OSWER 35% OPTS 30% OW D.OARM E.ORD F.OA&R G.OPPE
07. Which is closest to your length of feceral government service.
1 % less than 6 mos 3% 6 mos-1 yr 6%. 1 -2 yrs 15% 2-5 yrs 75% 5 yrs or more
08. Which is closest to your length of EPA service.
2% less than 6 mos 6%6mos-1yr 8%1-:>yrs 20% 2-5 yrs 64%. 5 yrs or more
09. Which is closest to your highest educational level attained
1% non high school grad 1% high school grad 6% some college
28% college grad 45% masters 13% doctorate 6% post doctorate work
10. Have you taken EPA contracting courses ? 99% yes 1% no
11. If yes, which ones ? 35% basic project officer course
9% contracts administration course 56% both
12. If no, will you have taken any of the EiPA courses by December 31,1988 ?
43% yes 19% no 38%donlknow
13. If you have taken the basic project officer course, did you find it
6% extremely helpful 18% very helpful 56% helpful 17% not very helpful 3% not helpful
at an
14. If you have taken the contracts administration course, did you find it
9% extremely helpful 25% very helpful 50% helpful 14% not very helpful 2% not helpful
at all
15. Do you feel that you have had enough training to fulfill your contracts
management duties ? 66% yes 34%. no
-------
16. Would you like further training ? 51% yes 49% no
17. If yes, in what areas ? Please specify
18. Have you taken other government contracting courses ? 21% yes 79% no
19. Do you have easy access to a copy of the project officer manual ?
91%. yes 9% no
20. Please evaluate the project officer manual. 2%. extremely helpful
20% very helpful 61% helpful 16% not very helpful 2% not helpful at all
21. Have you ever been officially designated to your contracts management
position by the Procurement & Contracts Management Division (PCMD) ?
29% yes 22% no 49% donl know
22. Is your present contracts management workload within the PCMD standards
according to the contracts manual ? 38% yes 5% no 57% doni know
23. What is your length of contract management experience ?
8% less than 3 mos 7%3-Gmos 10% 6 mos-1 yr 11%1yr-18mos 10% 18 mos-2 yrs
10%2-3yrs 11%3-5yrs 33%5ormoreyrs
24. What amount of your time do you spend on your contracts management
duties? 41%. 5-10% 28% 11-25% 16% 26-40% 7% 41-60% 3% 61-75%
5% more than 75%
25. Has your position description been amended to reflect your contracts
management work ? 68% yes 24% no 8%dontknow
26. Is any part of your annual performance rating based on your contracts
management duties ? 78%. yes 22% no
27. If yes, what weight is given your contracts management duties in your rating ?
6% none 32% 5-10% 31% 11-20% 13%. 21-30% 5% 31-45% 3% 46-60%
4% 61-75% 6%dorttknow
28. Do you feel that you receive enough credit for your contracts management
responsibilities in your performance evaluation? 66% yes 34% no
29. If you are a project officer, what is the present $ value of contracts you
monitor?
A.$1-$150,000 B.$151,000-$500,000 C. $500,001 -$1,000,000
D. $1,000,001 -$6,000,000 E. $6,000,001 -$25,000,000 F.$25,000,001-$50,000,000
K. more than $50,000,000
30. If you are a work assignment manager, what is the present $ value of
assignments that you monitor ?
10%$1-$10,000 12% $10,001 -$25,000 11% $25,001-$50,000
20%.$50,001-$100,000 20%. $100,001 -$200,000 27% More than $200,000
31. For how many contracts are you responsible?
39% 1 32% 2-3 5% 4-5 2% 6-8 0%9-10 2% more than 10 20%. None
-------
32. How many orders are active under tine contracts you monitor ?
40% 1-3 22% 4-8 10% 9-15 6% 16-25 7% 26-50 5% 51-75 3%. 76-150
9%morethan150
33. If you are a project officer, how man/ work assignment managers are working
on your contracts ? 4l%none 18% 1-3 12% 4-6 12% 7-10 7% 11-20 6% 21 -40
2% 41-80 2% 80 or more
34. If you are a project officer are you alito a manager/supervisor of people?
37% yes 63%. no
35. If yes, have you had any management training? 73% yes 27% no
36. Do you contribute to the rating of your work assignment managers?
33% yes 67% no
37. How knowledgable is your supervisor about contracts management ?
11% extremely knowledgable 22% very Knowledgable 31% knowledgable
28% somewhat knowledgable 8% not knowledgable at all
38. Has your supervisor taken any EPA contracts management courses ?
43% yes 14% no 43% don) know
39. Do you feel your supervisor supports your contracts management
responsibilities? 41% always 35% most of the time 19% sometimes
5% not very often 0% never
40. Do you feel your supervisor supports sound contract management practices ?
49% always 36% most of the time 9% sometimes 6% not very often 0%. never
41. How often do you discuss the contracts you work on with your supervisor ?
8% daily 42% weekly 17% every other week 18% monthly 8% quarterly 4% twice a year
2% once a year 1% never
42. In an ideal situation, how often do you think you should discuss your
contract(s) with your supervisor ? 5% daily 49% weekly 19% every other week
19%. monthly 6% quarterly 1%. twice a year 0% once a year 1% never
43. If you are a project officer how often do you and your contracting officer
discuss the contract you monitor ? 6% daily 19% weekly 13% every other week
24% monthly 13% quarterly 9% twice a year 5% once a year 11%. never
44. In an ideal situation, how often do you think you should discuss your
contract(s) with the contracting office r{s) ? 6% daily 26% weekly
13% every other week 28% monthly 18% quarterly 3% twice a year 3% once a year
3% never
45. Please evaluate your relationship with your contracting officer.
22% excellent 25% very good 36% good 7% not so good 10% poor
46. If you are a work assignment managor, evaluate your relationship with your
project officer. 32% excellent 33%veiygood 28% good 6%. not so good 1%poor
-------
47. If you are a work assignment manager, how often do you discuss your
assignment with your project officer. 2% daily 23% weekly 20%every other week
30% monthly 13% quarterly 5% twice a year 1% once a year 6% never
48. What area of the contract management process do you find most
troublesome? 12% Drafting statements of work 26% Creating independent cost estimates
25% Monitoring work of contractor 14% none
23% other, please specify
49. On what frequency do you receive technical/progress reports from vendors?
12% weekly 79% once a month 6% once a quarter 2% once a year 1% never
50. Are technical/progress reports timely ? 30% always 50%fequenBy
14% sometimes 6% not very often 0% never
51. Are technical/progress reports adequate for your needs and that of the
contracting officer ? 76% yes I5%no 9%dontkncw
52. Is the contract that you monitor a 21% fixed price 55% cost reimburseable
5% Indefinite quanfty 19% other, please specify
53. Have you ever recommended the termination of a contract ? 14% yes 86%. no
54. Have you ever taken remedial action to correct a problem with a vendor on a
contract matter? so%yes 50%no
Please take a moment to give us any additional comments that
you may have regarding the contracts management process at
EPA.
Thank you for taking your time to complete this survey I
-------
Appendix B
Training Requests
-------
-------
08/10/88 16:18:10
CONTRACTS SURVEY - AREAS FOR ADDITIONAL TRAINING
(* A=OSWER B=OPTS O=OW)
*OFFICE: GRADE: DESIRE FOR ADDITIONAL TRAINING:
CONTRACT MANAGEMENT
COST ESTIMATE
BETTER TRAINING IN CONTRACTS ADMIN.
COST ACCT'G FOR WA MGRS. & POs
DETAIL ANALY. OF CVSES RELATIVE EPA
BASIC PROJECT OFFICER
REVIEW OF BASIC INFORMATION
CONTRACT LAW
REFRESHER PROJ'T OFF./MANAGING CONT.
TRAINING FOR NAMS
HOW TO GET MOST OUT OF CONTRACTORS
WRITING FRPS and WAS
COURSE FOR WORK ASSIGNMENT MANAGERS
NEGOTIATIONS, FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING
CONTRACTS LAW
SUPERFUND CONTRACT!*
CONTINUED WORK ON CONTRACT MGMT.
RFPS, NEGOTIATIONS,, FINANCE
UPDATE CONTRACTING RULE/POLICY CHAN.
UNDERST'G PROCESS RE: CONTRACTORS
TRACKING MGMT, AVOIDING FAILURE FACT
HANDS-ON ABILITY FOR WAMs
PROJECT OFFICER
MANAGING THE CONTRATOR NOT PAPERWORK
PREPARATION OF WORK ASSIGNMENTS
PROCUREMENT, CONTRACT OPTIONS-TYPES
WRITING WORK ASSIGNMENTS
PHILOSOPHY & ENFORCEMENT OF CONTRACS
PROJECT OFFICER
BUDGET,.,FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
CONTRACTS MONITORING & EVALUATION
COST ESTIMATES/BRU«H-UP COURSES
WORK ASSIGN. MGR./UUDGET
CONTRACT OVERSIGHT
P.O. DUTIES/WAM/WR3IT. STATE. OF DUT.
UPDATES PERIODICALLY
CONT. MGMT./COST CONTROL/EVAL. COSTS
FINANCE AND BUDGET PROCESS
DAILY P.O'S CHORES FROM OSW PERSPEC.
CONTRACTS ADMINISTRATION
MGMT FROM THE PO POSITION-NOT PCMD
ESTIMATING LEVEL OF EFFORT
CONTRACTS ADMIN.-POST AWARD
WORK ASSIGNMENT MANAGER
CONTRACT ADMIN. - INVOICES
CONTRACT ANALYSIS
PREPARING RFPS/FINJiNCIAL MGMT:
TRAINING IN CONTRACT LAW
FISCAL MANAGEMENT
Pa
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
13
13
11
13
11
9
13
14
14
9
14
03
12
13
14
11
13
7
13
9
13
13
11
11
14
14
13
13
13
11
14
12
11
13
13
15
13
11
12
14
13
14
11
9
13
12
14
9
-------
A REAL WORLD CONTRACT MGMT-MICRO-MGMT
A 15 IDENTIFYING & REPORTING CONFLICTS
A 12 MANAGING CONTRACTS
A 13 BASE TO OPTION EXERCISE
A 14 RFP PREP./UNDERSTANDING REPORTS
A 13 EPA BUDGET & CONTRACTING PROCESS
A 7 PRICIING/BUDGETING COSTS
A 9 WORK ASSIGNMENT MANAGEMENT
A 9 CONTRACT APPROVAL AND IMPLEMENTATION
A 14 FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT PROGRAM SPECIFIC
A 13 CONTRACT MGMT. SKILLS
A 14 KEEPING ASSINGMENTS W/IN BUDGET
A 14 MONITORING CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE
A 12 CONTRACT ADMIN.
A 9 DAY TO DAY ADMINISTRATION '
A 14 UPDATES OF REFRESHER
A 7 JUSTIFICATIONS/MODIFICATIONS/AMEND.
A 13 EPA-SPECIFIC ISSUES
A 14 DEVELOPMENT OF GOOD WORK ASSIGNMENTS
A 13 ASSESSING HOURS/n IN DIF. CONTRACTS
A 9 NEGOTIATIONS & COMM. W/CONTRACTORS
B 15 ADMIN. BASED ON PC SOFTWARE SYSTEMS
B 14 CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION
B 13 REFRESHER/ CHANGE IN POLICY, ETC.
B 14 PREPARING RFPs, SYALUATING BEDS
B 14 UPDATES TO MANUALS
B 13 LAW
B 14 CONTRACT RENEWAL
B 13 FOLLOW-UP WORK AFTER RECEIVING CONT.
B 14 EPA LEVEL OF EFFORT CONTRACTS/ACCT'G
B 13 INVOICING/CHANGES TO D.O. PROCEDURES
B 13 BUDGET/ACCT'G./PROJECT MGMT.
B 14 UPDATES TO FAR
B 14 SUCCESSFULLY MANAGING CONTRACTORS
B 14 BIANNUAL REFRESHER COURSE
B 14 NEW FAR REGULATIONS
B 12 MANAGE DIF. TYPES OF CLOE, CONTRACTS
B 13 SPECIFICS FOR CONTRACTS/STRATEGIES
B 13 CONTRACT CLAUSES
B 14 CONTRACTS ADMINISTRATION
B 12 CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION
B 12 CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION
B 9 WRITING STATEMENTS OF WORK
B 13 CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION
B 15 CURRENT/NEW CHANGES IN CONTRACTING
B 12 TASK ORDER/WORK ASSIGNMENT STATEMENT
B 14 P.O. REFRESHER
B 15 TECHNICAL DIRECTIVE & INTERPRETATION
B 13 PERF. EVALUATIION FOR PEB RULGS
B 14 IAGs, COOPS
B 14 DAY TO DAY MGMT.;NEGOT./WORKING W/CO
B 12 PRACTICAL ASPECTS OF CONTRACT ADMIN.
B 15 MANAGING WORK ASSIGNMENTS/CONTRACTS
B 14 SPECIFIC DAY BY DAY MGMT. OF PROJECT
B 12 "HANDS-ON" MGMT. OF CONTRACT
-------
i] i ' ••? • -;
B 12 REFRESHER IN CONTRACT ADMIN.
B 11 CONTRACTS ADMINISTRATION
B 13 CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION
B 13 WRITE A GOOD SOW-ETHICS & BEHAVIOR
B 13 MONITORING WORK/TRACKING WORK
B 13 FORMS
B 13 TASK WRITING
B 13 PREP. PRIOR TO AWARD & CLOSE-OUT
B 13 NEGOTIATING LEGALLY W/CONTRACTORS
B 13 BUSINESS REPORTS/TFACKING FUNDING
B 12 INDIRECT COSTS/A-76 POLICY
B 13 COST ESTIMATION/VERIFICATION
B 13 MGMT. TECH. & FUNDING GUIDANCE
B 13 COST ANALYSIS/BUDGETING
B 14 ACCT'G POLICIES & PROCEDURES
B 14 COST ESTIMATION
B 14 PERIODIC REFRESHER COURSES
C 7 DAY TO DAY ACTIVITIES/PRICING
C 5 FINANCIAL MGMT.,TRACKING DELIVERABLE
C 9 CONTRACTS ADMINISTRATION
C 12 SPECIFICS
C 13 COST CONTROL/AUDIT
C 13 FINANCIAL END
C 12 CONTRACTS 'ADMINISTRATION
C 14 COST CONTROL/AUDIT-ACCEPTANCE SKILLS
C 9 CONTRACTS ADMINISTRATION
C 11 A HANDS-ON WORKSHOP
C 14 BASIC PROJECT OFFICER
C 13 PRACTICAL APPLICA.-PROJ./CONT. MGMT.
C 13 CONTRACTS ADMINISTRATION
C 14 REGULATIONS
C 13 FISCAL POLICY;ACCOUNTING
C 13 INTERNAL MONIES ALLOCATIONS-JUSTIFI.
C 14 SUPERVISOR OF WORK
C 13 ADMIN. OF COST-REIMB. CONT./SERVICES
C 9 CONTRACTS ADMINISTRATION
C 11 REVIEW
C 14 INDEPENDENT COST ESTIMATION
C 14 BASIC PROJECT OFFICER
C 11 CONTRACTOR MONITORING AND INTERACT.
C 13 CONTRACTS ADMINISTRATION
C 9 A CONTRACTS HOTLINE # WOULD HELP
C 13 COST ESTIMATING, COST CONTROL AND MA
C 14 NOT TRAIN/PERSE,BUT SOME DIRECTION
C 13 TAUGHT BY CONTRACT.PEOPLE IN CINN.
C 15 DAY-TO-DAY CONTRACT ADMIN.
C 7 CONTRACTS SUPER./MANAGEMENT COMM
C 14 PROJECT TRACKING
C 12 MONITORING CONTRACTOR, COST ESTIMATE
C 9 "APPRENTICESHIP" ON CONT. UNDER PO
C 12 CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION
C 13 BASIC PROJECT OFFICER
C 14 CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION
C 13 BUDGET MANGEMENT
C 14 FINANCIAL TRACKING/PAYMENT PROCEDURE
-------
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
13 DAY-TO-DAY P.O. FUNCTIONS
14 UPDATES OF THE PROCESS ANNUAL BASIS
7 BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF CONTRACTS
13 AWARD FEE MANAGEMENT
13 TAKING OUTSIDE COURSES
14 CONTRACT MONITORING
9 REFRESHER COURSE/UPDATES ON NEW DEV.
13 VOUCHER PROCESSING
9 CONTRACTS ADMIN. COURSE
9 ADP CONTRACT MGMT.
13 WORK SCOPE PREPARATION
14 HANDLING CONTRACTOR
15 SHORT UPDATES USING EX. OR CASE MET.
-------
Appendix C
Interview Guideline
-------
-------
INTERVIEW GUIDE
FOR THE
PROJECT OFFICER ENVIRONMENT STUDY
REMINDER TO INTERVIEWERS: This is a checklist not a script Follow leads and be yourself.
Introductory Statement of Study Objectives
The goal of this study to provide an accurate assessment of the state of EPA's contracts
management with a focus on the Project Officers' job environment, including the tools and
support the Agency provides to them. Interviewees will not be quoted directly in any reports or
presentations. Rather, their thoughts will be synthesized for the record.
General Questions
1. In three or four sentences, what has been your experience with the
Agency's contracting program?
2. What is the extent of contracting In your organization?
3. How is the decision made to contract out In your organization?
4. How involved are you personally in your organization's contracts
management process?
Managerial and Organizational Arrangements
5. How do you choose your contracts managers?
6. What is the typical weight given to contracts management in the
performance standards of executives, managers, supervisors, and project
officers In your organization?
7. Is contracts management more likely to be a primary responsibility or a
collateral duty for your contract managers?
-------
Training
8. Do you think the Project Officer training that PCMD provides is useful
to your contract managers?
Managerial Support
•
9. Do you have a structure in place to manage contracts In your
organization and what is it? Who Is the ranking person who monitors the
process and content of your contract operations?
10. Do you have built-in quality control procedures? What Is your
organization's approach to reviewing and approving Interim and final
contract products? Do you have automated tracking systems in place for
you contracts?
11. How Is contracts management perceived In your organization, I.e., is It
sought after avoided, or lust considered an acceptable assignment. Is It
perceived differently In different parts of the organization?
12. What Is your assessment of how contracts are being managed in your
organization, i.e., what is working and what are the most likely candidates
for Improvement?
Closing Statement
Thank you for the time you've taken to discuss your program's contracts management process with
us. We will use your comments along with the others we receive in an assessment of the
Agency's contracting system. We expect to complete our study by the end of the summer, and
will share our findings with your office. Again, thank you for helping us acheive our goal.
-------