ARMY AL&T
An aerial view of the Hamilton Wetlands Restoration Project site is shown here. (Photo courtesy of Mark DeFeo.)
activities for procurement personnel. Organizational policies and practices should explicitly reflect those invest- ments. Finally, the case stresses the importance of flexibility and a “contin- gency mindset” on the part of public procurement leaders. Professional development activities should inculcate and promote such a mindset, and policies and practices should exploit it to further organizational ends.
Emerging IRSPP Workshop Findings
While detailed comparative analysis of all the cases presented at the Lisbon workshop is only beginning, a few preliminary results have emerged. One important finding concerned the issue of whether a nation chose to relax procurement rules as a means to speed up or increase the number of stimulus obligations. Several workshop attendees reported that, in their countries, rules had indeed been relaxed. Examples include increasing acquisition thresh- olds for simplified procurements or eliminating so-called “2-envelope” sealed bid processes (where one enve- lope contains the technical proposal and the other envelope contains the price) in favor of sole-source or directed procurements. Relaxation of rules such as these can increase the risk of procurement abuses.
The U.S. was one of the few countries represented at IRSPP in which pro- curement rules not only haven’t been relaxed, but indeed, in some respects, were made more stringent under ARRA. ARRA includes a number of measures intended to ensure accountability and transparency of the uses and distribu- tion of funds. OMB’s implementing guidance provides several actions required for ARRA-funded grants and contracts that are beyond standard practice. Most significantly, OMB stresses the need for “heightened man- agement attention” to mitigate risks and, at the same time, satisfy ARRA objectives. OMB recommends “addi- tional oversight mechanisms” or, at a minimum, “the evaluation and dem- onstration that existing monitoring and oversight mechanisms are ade- quate,” as well as the need for effective agency internal control mechanisms. Other procedural changes are related to ARRA-unique reporting require- ments—for example, the publicizing of a contractual action as a “recovery” action and the tracking of obligated and expended ARRA funds.
That the USACE could successfully execute the Port of Oakland project is evidence that relaxation of procurement rules is not necessary for achieving stimulus objectives, even under very complex circumstances. The case
demonstrates the benefits of having a well-trained, motivated, and flexible professional workforce that can further national economic policies, while at the same time maintaining high levels of transparency and accountability.
JAMES D. BARTHA is the Region Chief of Contracting for the USACE National Contracting Organization, South Pacific Division, San Francisco. He holds a B.S. in both economics and political science and a master of public administration concentrating in pro- curement and grants management from American University. Bartha is a graduate of the U.S. Naval War College’s College of Command and Staff. He is certified Level III in contracting and Level II in program management, and is a U.S. Army Acquisition Corps (AAC) member.
KEITH F. SNIDER is Associate Professor of Public Administration and Management in the Graduate School of Public Administration and Policy at the Naval Postgraduate School (NPS). He holds a B.S. from the U.S. Military Academy, an M.S. in opera- tions research from NPS, and an Ph.D. in public administration and public affairs from Virginia Tech. Snider is a retired U.S. Army lieutenant colonel and former AAC member, and is certi- fied Level III in program management.
JULY –SEPTEMBER 2010 85
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96
