INNOVATION THROUGH TECHNOLOGY


contracting professional must complete multiple times throughout the course of awarding a new contract. Tis check is required during three stages of an acquisition:


• The market research stage: When the acquisition team is looking for contrac- tors that will be able to perform the type of work that they are looking for.


• The competitive range stage: Once the team requests and receives contractors’ proposals, in order to determine if the top contractors, or “competitive range,” that submitted proposals are capable of receiving a federal award.


• At the time of final award: To make sure that the selected contractor is still capable of receiving an award from the federal government (no suspensions,


WE WANT YOU TO JOIN US!


Is there an area of the contracting process that is a rote or repeatable process that you think is ripe for automation? Is your command, office or agency currently piloting or interested in piloting a new or emerging technology to streamline the contracting process? We would like to hear from you! We invite interested federal government agency leaders to provide information or demonstrations on acquisition innovation technologies that they are currently using. Please reach out to Liz Chirico, acquisition innovation lead at ODASA(P) at elizabeth.a.chirico. civ@mail.mil, or John Burchill, national account manager at GSA, at john. burchill@gsa.gov, to be included in future meetings and information sharing.


116 Army AL&T Magazine Winter 2020


debarments or violations of federal law have taken place since the last check).


As you can imagine, over the course of a year, contracting professionals perform many responsibility determination checks. A DASA(P) internal report showed that on average, the Army issues approximately 250,000 contract actions per year, requir- ing contracting professionals to determine whether a contractor is responsible in each stage of the action. Based on initial esti- mates, using an Army bot in the contractor responsibility determination process will save up to 13 days of time annually for each contracting professional (over 7,000 total) across the Army. Tirteen days saved per contracting professional would drastically help to reduce procurement administrative lead time across the board for all acquisitions, just by speeding up one small administrative task. Imagine if we applied robotic process automation solutions to other areas of the acquisition process: We could deliver capability to our Soldiers much faster.


CONCLUSION DASA(P) led the charge in acquisition modernization efforts by strategically collaborating with other federal agen- cies using technology enablers in the acquisition arena, piloting a contractor responsibility determination bot across the Army contracting enterprise, and by extending the bot capability and success of the pilot to other DOD and federal agen- cies to use.


By leveraging these new and emerging technologies, we can drive productiv- ity, increase quality and save time—and everyone wants the ability to work more efficiently. Every generation of new tech- nology enables new business processes, often improving quality of life in ways once unimaginable. Automation in acquisition is no different. Leveraging


emerging technology and innovation within the federal space aligns with the President’s Management Agenda as well as the National Defense Strategy. Both documents highlight the critical need for government agencies and DOD to enhance mission effectiveness through the modernization of systems, processes and capabilities.


Federal acquisition leaders should continue to coordinate and collaborate, sharing successes and thinking of creative ways to use rapidly evolving technology to streamline acquisition and business processes. Together, we can change the shape of acquisition by employing technol- ogy to better enable the federal workforce to deliver capability more efficiently and effectively.


For more information, go to the Office of the DASA(P) website: https:// spcs3.kc.army.mil/asaalt/procurement/ SitePages/PAMHome; or contact Liz Chirico at elizabeth.a.chirico.civ@mail. mil, or John Burchill at john.burchill@ gsa.gov.


ELIZABETH CHIRICO is the acquisition innovation lead in the ODASA(P). She holds an M.S. in acquisition and contract management from the Florida Institute of Technology and a B.A. in English from the University of Mary Washington. She is Level III certified in contracting and is a member of the Army Acquisition Corps.


JOHN BURCHILL is the Army national account manager at the GSA. He holds an MBA from Binghamton University and a B.S. in marketing and management from Ithaca College. He has Level II Federal Acquisition Certification for Contracting Officer’s Representatives, an ITIL Founda- tions Certification and a master’s certificate in federal project management.


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  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140  |  Page 141  |  Page 142  |  Page 143  |  Page 144  |  Page 145  |  Page 146  |  Page 147  |  Page 148  |  Page 149  |  Page 150  |  Page 151  |  Page 152  |  Page 153  |  Page 154  |  Page 155  |  Page 156  |  Page 157  |  Page 158  |  Page 159  |  Page 160  |  Page 161  |  Page 162  |  Page 163  |  Page 164  |  Page 165  |  Page 166  |  Page 167  |  Page 168  |  Page 169  |  Page 170  |  Page 171  |  Page 172  |  Page 173  |  Page 174  |  Page 175  |  Page 176