“Reporter’s Notebook” is a weekly dispatch of news tidbits, strongly-sourced buzz, and other items of interest happening in the federal IT and acquisition communities.
Submit ideas, suggestions and news tips to Jason via email.
The Defense Information Systems Agency may be best known for the more than $5 billion in contracting support it provides the military services and agencies each year. But with the move of the Joint Force Headquarters, DoD Information Network (JFHQ-DoDIN) to DISA earlier this year, the agency is playing a bigger role in securing the Pentagon’s networks and data.
Just listen to what Dana Deasy, the Defense Department’s chief information officer, said are his priorities: Cloud, cybersecurity, artificial intelligence and next generation command and control. All of these relate back to the work DISA is doing and will continue to do into 2019. And it’s also the reason why DISA’s Forecast to Industry day is one of the must-attend events each year.
More than 500 people journeyed out to Linthicum, Maryland on Nov. 5 to hear from and meet with DISA’s senior executives. While the focus on the days tends to be the agency’s acquisition plans for 2019, including the timing of the release of solicitations and awards as well as any acquisition strategy that it has determined, the real benefit for contractors is the policies and programs behind the contracts.
It’s also more than just DISA discussing the products and services it wants to buy, but officials discussing why they are buying them.
The Forecast to Industry day continues to be a refreshing reminder of the importance of and what success looks like around industry-government communication. To be clear, the model isn’t perfect by any means, but it’s heads and tails above what most agencies do.
Here are three highlights from the event:
A new endpoint security policy is coming from DoD.
Lisa Belt, the acting cyber development executive, said the document will incorporate lessons learned over the last year from the military services’ pilots of different end point detection, response and containment tools.
Belt said it also is based on the results from the DoD cyber architecture review effort and a new analysis of the end point threats the military faces.
The strategy aims to converge the security of traditional end points like laptops with new ones like mobile devices and critical infrastructure systems.
DoD has been using a host based security system (HBSS) approach for much of the past decade. DISA says “HBSS is designed to provide a flexible, modular design that enables expansion of the tool by incorporating additional security capabilities, integrating existing security products, and eliminating redundant systems management processes.”
The DoD CIO’s office asked DISA to test new endpoint security technologies. DISA worked with the Army Research Laboratories at Adelphi, Maryland to analyze eight endpoint detection and response and application containment technologies.
“We’ve got some ongoing piloting activities, live environments out with the services and our mission partners. We are learning about what’s working there and what isn’t,” she said. “Expect to see some acquisition strategies refined in this space as we move forward over the next three-to-six months.”
Belt said DoD has done good work to secure traditional endpoints, but as the Pentagon’s environment becomes more complex, a next generation approach is needed.
“We have a phased approach because of the complicated environment,” she said. “Mobility has been expressly and intently built into that strategy as well as supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA), Internet of Things and more non-traditional endpoints where we’ve done some work across the enterprise but we really eventually under this phased approach will need to get after how all of these various endpoints security can come together.”
DISA has several irons in the proverbial fire around identity management and access control.
First, the traditional use of PKI, public key infrastructure, will continue as DISA and the National Security Agency are the joint program manager of the program.
“We are working our way through what happens in the identity space. This is key and transformational. It’s on Mr. Deasy’s top 10 cyber list. If we don’t get the next generation of identity right with quantum computing coming at us and encryption, we really don’t have much to talk about if we can’t definitively identify who is on the network, where they are and how they’re operating, everything else we are doing is interesting, but not as effective as it could be,” Belt said. “So working closely with the innovation folks, we have our engineers and our program managers with some key stakeholders and mission partners on what identity will look like writ large in the next three-to-five years.”
In the short term, DISA is trying to improve its current approach.
For instance, Douglas Packard, DISA’s procurement services executive, said the agency released a request for a white paper under Other Transaction Authority (OTA) for how artificial intelligence could help assure a user’s identity on a mobile device.
“It has a set of models and we are building them into fusion score and making a decision based on risk,” he said. “We are using AI in several places, but I don’t see us specific buying AI.”
This effort is in addition to DISA’s Purebred program, which replaces the need for smart card readers to send digitally signed and encrypted email, decrypt email, and authenticate to DoD websites when using a DoD mobile device. DISA says “Purebred provides a secure, over-the-air credentialing process through a series of one-time passwords and user demonstrated possession and use of a CAC.”
Currently there are more than 32,000 users of the Purebred technology.
At the same time, DISA rolled a series of services under PKI to improve identity management and access control.
Jason Martin, the services executive, said DISA now has a single authoritative source of identity data for all of their customers and the applications and endpoint devices.
“To secure all that … we rolled out virtual desktop interface (VDI) for those folks who have access to privileged information. So our entire privileged user base is now using a scaled down version of an enterprise VDI,” he said. “We are very excited about that capability. We have been able to eliminate over 200,000 user accounts simply by developing a single authentication solution and a single entry into that solution. From a security threat vector perspective, that’s pretty good. We dramatically reduced our threat vector simply by instituting two solutions.”
Martin said DISA wants to provide these VDI tools to other services as well.
All of the work around identity management is helping lead DISA toward a zero trust network.
Belt said it will take DoD some time to get to a full zero trust network, but identity and the endpoint security policy are pieces to the bigger puzzle.
Every senior official who presented mentioned the word cloud in some way or another. So it’s not surprising that DISA continues to be leading many DoD efforts around cloud.
Even with all the anxiety and drama over the $10 billion JEDI cloud program, officials tried to make clear to the industry audience that a multi-cloud approach is the only way for the Pentagon.
Deasy, the DoD CIO, said the military will use both a general purpose cloud and a fit-for-purpose cloud.
“I’ve been asked a lot about our cloud strategy and I keep pointing out there will be multiple vendors, multiple clouds,” Deasy said.
No matter what happens with JEDI, DISA continues to move out with its cloud initiatives including the maturing of MilCloud 2.0 and the Defense Enterprise Operations Solutions (DEOS) strategy.
Martin said DISA already has migrated 30 applications to the MilCloud 2.0 and more are coming as the “fourth estate” agencies migrate more than 100 data centers to the offering by March 2019.
“What we are doing now is placing heavy emphasis on integrating us with the commercial vendors’ off-premise solutions for cloud with the secure cloud computing environment point also known as the cloud access points (CAPs),” he said. “That is where we’ve placed a lot of emphasis, time and effort over the past six months, and we will continue to over the next year or two as we continue to move people onto the unclassified (NIPR) CAPs and as we build out the secret (SIPR) CAPs.”
Martin said DISA also is increasing the security of MilCloud 2.0 to increase to an impact level six on the secret enclave. Martin said he expects to reach that security level by early 2019.
And finally, DISA will decommission MilCloud 1.0 November 2019 and move all the existing capabilities on to version 2.0 over the next year.
The decision by the Office of Management and Budget to give agencies more flexibility in how they meet the requirements of the continuous diagnostics and mitigation (CDM) program may be seen by some as a much needed change to a program that has been slow and, at times, frustrating.
But if you’re Kevin Cox, the CDM program manager at the Homeland Security Department, your glass is more than just half full. It’s a chalice full of hope and possibilities.
Cox sees the bright future for CDM in new ways from security operations-as-a-service (SOCaaS) to shared services for small and micro agencies to ensuring agencies are a part of the continuous improvement cycle because cybersecurity is never done.
Most of all Cox is a pragmatist about the program because agency needs change, vendors’ ability to provide new tools and services ebb and flow with emerging technologies and just because there was a plan three or five years ago, he knows approaches always can be improved.
“One of the things that we as a program really want to get our focused shifted to is the idea of the requirements for the program rather than coming out with specific solutions. We want to know first and foremost what those requirements are, and then we want to make sure we are working with the agencies to understand what those requirements are and in the long run meet those requirements,” Cox said on Ask the CIO. “We worked with OMB to really keep it requirements focused, and ultimately benefit the agencies so they had a memo to take to their components and offices and say, ‘we all need this at the agency level, at the federal level to understand what our enterprise looks like from a cyber perspective.’”
The CDM program, once again, stepped into its next evolution with OMB’s fiscal 2019 Federal Information Security Management Act (FISMA) guidance that opened the door for agencies to acquire tools and services outside the initiative’s bounds or use existing cybersecurity software that meets the program’s requirements.
Cox said DHS has heard regularly from agencies about the time it took to deploy tools as well as the question about why they should replace existing tools that were working and meeting the requirements of CDM.
“We don’t want to have the perception that we are focused on a particular solution. We want to make sure the requirements remain the focus and if an agency can show those requirements, then we will take the data from that system to meet the requirement,” he said. “At times there was a perception that CDM was coming in to rip and replace entire solutions that were working. We don’t want that to be the case. A key for the CDM program is the partnership not only with the agencies but also the integrators to get the right solutions for the agency and make sure everything interfaces for communication purposes, and the agency gets the visibility they need and federal leadership gets the visibility they need to ensure the federal enterprise is secure.”
To DHS and the General Services Administration’s credit—a lot of it goes to Jim Piche, GSA’s Federal Acquisition Service’s homeland sector director for FedSIM—for recognizing the need to change CDM. While it’s been far from perfect and it is a fair criticism that it took GSA and DHS too long to move off the initial approach, the agency partners along with OMB recognized the need for this latest change more quickly. Along with the new acquisition approach of awarding long-term, services-based contracts, the focus on requirements rather than specific solutions seem to be coming at the right time.
DHS is starting to face a backlog of requests for additional CDM-related capabilities.
Greg Decker, a principal with Booz Allen Hamilton and who is the chief engineer for the CDM program, said at the recent Symantec Government Symposium with DHS and GSA awarding more than $3.2 billion in cyber contracts over the last year, the competition for expertise is strong as is the demand for services from agencies.
“The DEFEND contractors are completing Phases 1 and 2, filling gaps for Phase 1 and finishing Phase 2,” Decker said. “That will give agency leadership a complete view of the enterprise through the dashboard and begin to transform the sensors to integrate with the governmentwide and agencywide dashboards. We also are seeing agencies incorporating more threat intelligence especially around their high-value assets into the dashboard.”
Decker added that DHS also is prioritizing the requirements based on what they see across agencies through their government cyber architecture review effort.
Cox said DHS is starting to see a bottleneck in terms of the number of staff they can put toward it. He said he has been working with DHS leadership to hire as many as 30 more employees in the coming months.
Part of the reason for the bottleneck of requirements is a change in how DHS and agencies determine the next set of capabilities.
“We need to make sure the agencies and DHS are defining the requirements before we go to the integrator and have them come back with a proposal. What we don’t want to do is say ‘integrator, define our requirements for us.’ What gets delivered may not be what we really need. It’s something that we’ve really worked to introduce discipline within our own program as well our interactions with agencies. That’s why we can’t say Booz Allen, CACI or whomever, come up with something new,” Cox said. “In terms of timing around the backlog, a lot of it is just volume right now. We’ve got all the DEFEND task orders in place so all the agencies are coming to us with ideas for requests for services and we have our own RFSes so that’s why we are starting to see a backlog. But I think overall we have good management on it. It’s not like we have a tremendous backlog, we just have some slow down.”
Cox and DHS, and GSA should be recognized for the ability to change and evolve as too many times agency programs believe the risks are too great and the rewards are not worthwhile enough to change, and that’s why we see failed technology programs that waste millions of dollars.
The federal technology community is mourning the loss of Jeff Koch.
You may not know the name and that’s OK. But you’ve probably been impacted by Koch’s creative and practical work on federal technology and management issues over the past 20 years.
Koch, who served as the Labor Department’s deputy assistant secretary for administration and management for the last year, passed away suddenly Nov. 3 from liposarcoma, a rare form of cancer that begins in the fat cells. He had been battling the disease since 2015, going in to remission and out of remission several times.
Koch was 55 years old and is survived by Patty Stolnacker Koch, his wife of seven years. The couple is expecting their first child in January.
“Jeff’s sudden passing shocked and saddened his many colleagues and friends at the Department of Labor,” said Pat Pizzella, deputy secretary of Labor, in an email to Federal News Network. “Those of us who worked with Jeff at DOL during the Bush administration and the past year will miss his keen intellect and sharp sense of humor. Jeff’s combined expertise in classical music, personal computers and guns made him always fun to be part of any conversation.”
Koch, who was known for his twin passions of classical music and the Boy Scouts, was a true public servant. After a short time in the private sector, Koch found his third passion – good government. He came to Washington as chief of staff for Rep. Pete Sessions (R-Texas) in 1998, and moved to DOL as its associate chief information officer in 2002.
“It was a shock that we are here but we’ve come to say Jeff Koch is worthy of the accolades he will receive in heaven,” Sessions said the funeral service on Nov. 10 in Alexandria, Virginia.” Jeff excelled in the exuberance of life and shined in the light of other people.”
Where Koch made his biggest impact on federal service was during his time as an e-government portfolio manager at the Office of Management and Budget, where he worked on the government-to-government projects.
Tim Young, who as the deputy federal CIO during the Bush administration and an e-government portfolio manager at OMB, said Koch had an “unwavering commitment” to improving federal technology.
“Jeff was successful in getting so much done because of his poise, persistence, and persuasion,” said Young, who now is a principal with Deloitte, in an email to Federal News Network. “Jeff was the colleague you went to when you had a large, complex, politically-sensitive challenge to solve. You went to Jeff because his response was always ‘Yes, and … ,’ followed by numerous (emphasis on ‘numerous!’) probing questions, some light-hearted humor and refreshing optimism and enthusiasm to get to a solution.”
“In several contentious E-Gov governance board meetings, Jeff showed his distinctive ability to cut through tense moments through his wit, ‘unconventional’ sense of humor, and self-deprecation,” Young said. “He had this amazing ability to lead change by simply being his authentic self.”
As several colleagues said, Koch was the last one to turn out the lights at OMB when the Bush administration ended, sending emails to agencies 30 minutes before Barack Obama was sworn in as president.
“Jeff was a true public servant, whom I had the privilege of serving alongside at OMB for five years. He was an inspiration to those around him, dedicated to his work and achieving results. His loss is not only a loss for the community, but for the nation,” said Karen Evans, assistant Secresary of the Department of Energy’s Office of Cybersecurity, Energy Security, and Emergency Response.
On a personal note, I covered Koch during his time at OMB and at Labor, and kept in touch with him over the last decade since he left federal service. He never criticized the new administration, offering only thoughtful insights, historical context and direct questions about federal management issues.
Koch wore his passions on his sleeve and never wavered in his belief that a little hard work from a group of people with shared goals made anything possible.
Time and again, he showed the resilience in pushing federal IT and management issues up a steep hill, whether dealing with grumpy political appointees or frustrated contractors.
Outside of work, Koch enjoyed life. He played the cello in the community orchestra, lead a Boy Scout troop, and entertained the neighborhood with a super-spooky haunted house for Halloween and mega slip-n-slide on July Fourth. He also was an Eagle Scout, a ham radio operator, a rare arms collector, a competitive cycler and played Ultimate Frisbee.
His friends and relatives called Koch a “renaissance man” for his varied interests and his ability to be feel comfortable in a tuxedo or covered in mud.
“For Jeff, it was less about the activity and more about enjoying the companionship of the people around him,” said his long-time friend Brian Carlson at the service.
Koch may not have been a household name in the federal technology community, but his impact will continue to be felt for decades to come and his legacy is one we all should aspire to.
There are few truer public servants who grace the IT community the way Koch did. For that, we are thankful and will miss him.
In other personnel news, the General Services Administration is losing one technology executive to the private sector and gaining one back at the same time.
Navin Vembar, the GSA chief technology officer since 2016, is leaving to join CollabraLink to be the chief technology officer. Vembar joined GSA in 2011 as an enterprise data manager, became the director of the IT Integrated Award Environment (IAE) in 2013 to rescue the failing Sam.gov site, and eventually CTO.
CollabraLink is an IT services and consulting firm providing systems development and integration, technology infrastructure support and program/project management services.
Meanwhile, Beth Killoran, the former chief information officer at the Department of Health and Human Services, also found a new job, as GSA’s deputy CIO. She updated her LinkedIn page Nov. 12 confirming the rumored move.
Finally, Tonya Ugoretz, the director of the Cyber Threat Intelligence Integration Center (CTIIC), is heading back to the FBI after serving for two years with the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI). Ugoretz will return to the FBI as the deputy assistant director for intelligence in FBI’s cyber division. She is a career FBI intelligence analyst who joined CTIIC as its first director in 2016 under a two-year detail.
She entered the government in 2001 as a Presidential Management Fellow and as an all-source analyst with the FBI’s counterterrorism program. In 2003, she became the first analyst to serve as the FBI director’s daily intelligence briefer.
The Homeland Security Department laid out its plans in late October for a fourth attempt since 2003 to modernize its financial management system.
After failing twice with the private sector and once with a federal shared service provider, DHS told industry on Oct. 24 in a notice in FedBizOpps.gov that its market research revealed a two-pronged approach that may just work this time.
“At this point, the government plans to conduct two procurements for the Financial Procurement and Asset Management Systems (FPAMS): 1) software, and 2) system integration support services,” the notice states. “The government anticipates the award of the software procurement in June 2019. The government anticipates the award of the system integration support services in August 2019. The government expects to issue a draft statement of work, evaluation factors, and price schedule in December 2018.”
DHS’s decision to buy software and then integration support services isn’t surprising or unexpected. It is, however, a glimpse into the future of federal shared services.
When the Office of Management and Budget releases the December update to the President’s Management Agenda, the shared services cross-agency priority goal — Number 5 of 14 if you are keeping score at home — will have refreshed strategy.
Suzette Kent, the federal chief information officer, offered a small glimpse into what we should expect at the Nov. 1 Shared Service Summit sponsored by the Association of Government Accountants, ACT-IAC and the Shared Services Leadership Coalition.
“The way that we are going about the journey is in three pieces. The first is we are looking at services that are already fairly widely used and there is a lot of agreement. Maybe some of those are smaller services … like fleet management. We will be elevating those to the model that matches the target state of how the services are provided, which includes a focus on continuous innovation, a priority for customer service and shows ways we can get some quick wins,” she said. “The second thing we are focusing on are in areas [such as human resources or financial management] where we are driving out the standards and defining the journey around that set of solutions.”
Kent said that could mean coming to agreement across the government on the standards and then move out for quick wins in those areas.
Finally, the third piece of the strategy is continuous innovation.
“Some of the barriers in the past have been once a service is rolled out that connection to continued improvement, leveraging new technologies, changing the operating model, continuing to build, grow and identify other services, that is a commitment we have to make,” Kent said. “It’s that ongoing commitment that we just don’t get to a place and stop, and get to that place and it’s just a starting point in the journey. And the agency is continually involved in defining new requirements, enhancements and leveraging those innovations so we continue to drive value, benefit and use modern technology.”
Kent said the refreshed strategy helps meet agencies where they are, but gives them an idea of what success looks like today and in the future. The administration is focused on 14 areas that it believes are ripe for shared services and which could save the government $2 billion over the next decade.
Other near term shared services opportunities for shared service that are emerging are around contract close-out and records management.
Beth Angerman, the acting principal deputy associate administrator in the Office of Governmentwide Policy at the General Services Administration and executive director of the Unified Shared Services Management office, put a finer point on the forthcoming update.
She said the PMA CAP goal for shared services includes 10 goals, including the requirement for agencies to participate in the development of standards so agencies can have a big say in what the future capabilities will be for HR or financial management or any area where shared services could work.
Another one is an acknowledgement that the government doesn’t need to build its own IT systems any more.
“There are commercial systems that exist that can help us drive better processes in government because those commercial solutions already have incorporated so many of those best practices that exist in industry,” she said at the summit. “The second one is one size doesn’t fit all. Hopefully, the new strategy really does give every agency the opportunity to declare some level of success, whether it’s through the participation of standards or through the adoption of existing services, and the goal will point out what those are, or whether it’s thinking through the plant to adopt new centralized services.”
The third piece to the strategy is competition is key and the government needs to be smarter buyer. Angerman said both of these factors came through clearly in the market research the USSM office did over the last year or so.
“That is the role you will see start to emerge for the service management offices to help us prevent the proliferation of instances, to help us make sure that we have smart contracts that give us the opportunity to bring innovation and to make sure we actually don’t have vendor lock-in,” she said. “All of the things that we’ve heard are the concerns of customers over time.”
There are plenty of examples over the last 15 years where these problems arose. Around too many instances, just look at the E-Travel program. GSA Administrator Emily Murphy said every agency uses the same travel management system, but each has a different version totaling more than 40 across government.
With vendor lock-in, the Labor Department’s experience shows why this has been a concern. Labor moved to a private sector provider for financial management services in 2010 only to have to buy back the software and the interfaces in 2014 for more than $20 million when the vendor went bankrupt.
And around innovation, the USSM office is emphasizing the “as-a-service” approach so agencies can buy services and not systems, which tended to be static while cloud services can be dynamic.
This brings us back to DHS and their seemingly never-ending effort to modernize their financial management systems. In its request for information from March, DHS wanted information on cloud and non-cloud systems. It wanted to know about application programming interfaces (APIs) and it wanted to know how the software is or plans to use artificial intelligence, blockchain and/or robotics process automation.
If DHS writes the solicitation using the tenets of the administration’s new strategy, then there may be hope for it and many other agencies like it that shared services may actually gain some real traction this time. Over the last 15 years, beyond payroll services, there have been only a handful of success stories and too many failures.
“We are making it a little better every time the baton is passed [from one administration to another],” Angerman said. “We are excited about the future.”
Nine states already allow for sports betting and 19 others have some sort of legislative action underway to make it legal, according to ESPN’s Oct. 30 sports betting tracker.
Betting on sport is so popular that the American Gambling Association estimates that all four major sports leagues would earn a collective $4.2 billion from legalized sports betting.
So what does this all have to do with federal government management issues?
Well, thanks for asking.
The Office of Management and Budget’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) recently released its semi-annual regulatory agenda and it got me thinking about the proposed and final Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) rules.
What are the chances of any of these rules getting past the finish line?
Well given the fact that over the last two years, the number of FAR rules that were either proposed or finalized was scarce, and there doesn’t seem to be any change on the horizon, I thought we might have some fun with the federal acquisition by putting some odds on how likely the most significant of the 36 proposed and nine final FAR rules would come to fruition.
The oddsmakers should keep in mind that George Washington University professor Bridget Dooling found the number of significant regulatory activity has fallen 74 percent since the Trump administration took office. During the first 18 months of the administration, agencies launched fewer than 250 big rules, compared to 807 in the first year of Barack Obama’s administration and more than 700 in George W. Bush’s first year.
I brought in my own version of a sports oddsmaker in Larry Allen, the president of Allen Federal Business partners and long-time federal acquisition observer and expert, to help me explain the odds we set:
1. Determination of fair and reasonable prices on orders under multiple award contracts
Odds: 5 to 1
Rationale: This one has a pretty good chance because several agencies already wrote deviations to the FAR that directs contracting officers to determine price reasonableness on their own. Allen said the next phase would be to bring this concept down to the task order level.
2. Use of Acquisition 360 to encourage vendor feedback
Odds: 25 to 1
Rationale: This proposed rule goes back to 2016 under the Obama administration so the likelihood of it getting through is not good. At the same time, Allen said it hasn’t gone away either in almost three years. “How would you regulate the feedback? There are a lot of things to get a 360 view of a transparent acquisition that doesn’t require a new rule, but changes in the processes and reminders to follow the rules on the books, including encouraging vendor feedback would be helpful,” he said. “I’m not sure there is a really strong regulatory case for it.”
3. Section 508-based standards in information and communication technology
Odds: 6 to 1
Rationale: The Access Board recently finalized updated Section 508 standards so this FAR update is almost an important formality. Allen said agencies still struggle to get Section 508 right in contracts so changing the FAR shouldn’t be too difficult.
4. Incremental funding of fixed-price contracting actions
Odds: 30 to 1
Rationale: This 2016 proposal isn’t likely to break through after almost three years. Allen said there has been a big push for much of the last decade to bring some uniformity to fixed price contracts as there already are regulations on the books for incremental funding for cost-plus type contracts. “This rule may end up being superseded by other happening with the Section 809 panel and the Defense Department going back to the drawing board on incremental funding for its contracts,” Allen said.
5. Definition of a “commercial” item
Odds: 15 to 1
Rationale: This one comes out of the 2018 Defense authorization bill where lawmakers wanted to expand and clarify what it means for agencies to buy commercial products and services. Allen said while this is an important proposal, there will be a lot of interest and that could slow down the process. This is why the odds of the council finalizing it in the next year are low.
6. Increasing task-order level competition
Odds: 7 to 2
Rationale: This is another one coming from the NDAA, but the most recent one signed into law in August. The proposed rule is a key piece to the General Services Administration’s goal of moving to unpriced schedules, which is why the odds are lower than most others. Allen said while the concept is limited to services contracts, which do account for a majority of federal acquisition spending, the broad goal is for agencies to get better pricing at the time of purchase. “It could create more burden on contracting officers, but it would mean they get more real time pricing based on scope of work,” he said.
7. Governmentwide and other interagency contracts
Odds: 10 to 1
Rationale: The goal of this rule would be to do away with requirements for DoD to need a written determination and finding before using non-Defense contracts. Allen said this requirement is a huge stumbling block for military services and Defense agencies. “Getting a D&F to use GSA’s Alliant or the schedules slows things down and requires more paperwork. Even when the services have an agreement to use Oasis or Alliant,” he said. “Section 875 is being read by industry as eliminating that requirement. It could streamline DoD acquisition and improve the use of non-DoD contracts across the govt.” At the same time, Allen said the odds are lower than some might think as the possibility of push back from DoD is real while the Pentagon waits for Section 809 panel recommendations and/or they want more analysis on how DoD is using non-Defense contracts.
1. Set-asides under multiple award contracts
Odds: 50 to 1
Rationale: The chances of this final rule finally cross the finish line remains long, particularly considering the council has been sitting on it since 2014. Allen said recent court decisions — the 2016 Kingdomware case requiring the Veterans Affairs Department to abide by the “rule of two” for small veteran-owned firms — has slowed down the progress of the proposed rule, causing the council to rethink whether they have to apply the “rule of two” to all task order contracts. “The odds are low and the rule may become irrelevant as we get Section 846 [e-commerce marketplace pilot] up and running,” he said. “It is more likely that the FAR case will be closed and a new one will be opened up that reflects all of these changes. This is not to say this isn’t important, but time may have overcome the current rule.”
2. Effective communication between government and industry
Odds: 3 to 1
Rationale: Of the 47 final and proposed rules, this one is the most likely to make it across home plate. Allen said this is one of those cases where OMB issued guidance, but until the FAR regulations change, there are a host of government acquisition people who are more conservative and need regulations to change. There is a lot of support across the government and industry acquisition communities for the use of tools such as reverse industry days, the “show, don’t tell me” approach to bids and other “innovations,” thus making this rule popular and an easy one to agree upon.
3. Prohibition on certain telecommunications and video surveillance services or equipment
Odds: 4 to 1
Rationale: This one also gets good odds because it’s part of the ongoing and increasingly strong focus on supply chain risk management. The FAR Council will implement the 2019 NDAA provision that prohibits agencies from buying products from China-based companies ZTE and Huawei Technologies. “Prohibiting agencies from buying from these companies because of the potential and real impact on the security of their supply chains is a big deal for industry and an even bigger deal for the government,” Allen said. “The rule is putting industry on notice saying technology from these companies are walled off to you whether you can save money or not. The biggest use of this is around the training on supply chain security.”
What are the chances of the Trump administration naming a permanent administrator in the Office of Federal Procurement Policy over the next 12 months?
Odds: 250 to 1
Rationale: It’s been more than two years since OFPP has had a permanent administrator and so far four candidates haven’t made it through the process for a variety of reasons. Allen said he doesn’t see any change on the horizon, either. “The administration has gone this long so they may be saying ‘why do we need one?’” he said. “And even if you named someone, it would be nine to 12 months before they got confirmed and then would only be in the position for nine to 12 months, so why measure for new curtains?”
The federal chief information officer’s council is restocking its committees after a wave of agency volunteer leaders moved to new positions across government or left government altogether.
Steve Hernandez, the Education Department’s chief information security officer, Dorothy Aronson, the National Science Foundation’s CIO, and Ron Bewtra, the Justice Department’s chief technology officer, stepped up to take on new leadership roles.
Hernandez now is the co-chairman of the federal CISO committee, joining Federal CISO Grant Schneider.
Aronson will join Education CIO Jason Gray as the head of the workforce committee. She replaces Beth Killoran, who moved to a new role in August.
Bewtra joins Maria Roat, the Small Business Administration’s CIO, to co-lead the innovation committee.
Along with these changes in the CIO community, a few others caught my eye.
Chris Lowe, the former Agriculture Department CISO, started a new position as CISO at USDA’s Agricultural Research Service (ARS).
The rumor mill heated up back in March that USDA leadership wanted to reassign Lowe to a new position. It’s unclear whether that happened or if Lowe found a new role on his own. Lowe recently updated his LinkedIn page with the new ARS role.
Over at the Department of Housing and Urban Development, former acting CIO Chad Cowan received a promotion to acting assistant secretary for administration and principal deputy assistant secretary for administration
Over at the General Services Administration, Rob Coen now is the new One Acquisition Solution for Integrated Services (OASIS) program manager, moving over after spending the last two years as the FedSIM and Express strategy director.
Additionally, GSA named Penny Grout to be the Federal Acquisition Services regional commissioner in Region 8 and Tom Meiron to be the Regional Commissioner in Region 4, according to an Oct. 29 email from FAS Commissioner Alan Thomas obtained by Federal News Network.
Finally, GSA announced on Oct. 31 that Administrator Emily Murphy named Jeffrey Post as the associate administrator for its Office of Congressional and Intergovernmental Affairs (OCIA) where he will serve as the chief policy advisor.
Over at the Labor Department, Dennis Johnson has been selected as the director of Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration and Management’s (OASAM) Performance Management Center. He had been acting in the role for the past 23 months where he developed a new four-year strategic plan, expanded the department’s continuous process improvement (CPI) program, and strengthened the connections between the department’s budget and performance functions. That’s according to an email from Bryan Slater, Labor’s assistant secretary for administration and management, obtained by Federal News Network.
One retirement of note has come to our attention: Mike Butler, who spent the last eight years with the Defense Manpower Data Center and has been a leader in the federal identity management community for the last 18 years, decided to try out the private sector.
Butler now is a director with Dignari, LLC where he will lead the emerging technology team to create new and innovative capabilities for clients. Dignari is a woman-owned small business serving national security and defense agencies by providing biometrics, identity management, emerging technologies and data analytics services and technologies.
Butler spent 15 years in the Navy before retiring in 1995. He joined DoD as a civilian helping to stand up the Defense Access Card Office. He also worked at GSA to begin the implementation of Homeland Security Presidential Directive-12 (HSPD-12), served on a seven month detail with the Office of Management and Budget’s e-government office and spent just over a year at the National Institute of Standards and Technology working on smartgrid cybersecurity before going back to DMDC.
If you read through the new Federal Information Security Management Act (FISMA) guidance for fiscal 2019, the letter from Suzette Kent, the federal chief information officer, to the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, and listen to what the Office of Management and Budget has been saying about the upcoming Trusted Internet Connections (TIC) memo, the message to agencies is clear.
Agencies can no longer point to the Homeland Security Department as the excuse for why improvements to the security of their networks and data aren’t happening fast enough.
OMB is giving agencies a stronger voice and driving accountability back to CIOs, chief information security officers and deputy secretaries.
In the FISMA guidance and letter to the committee, which Federal News Network obtained, OMB is adding flexibilities in how agencies meet the requirement of governmentwide programs like the continuous diagnostics and mitigation (CDM) and the intrusion detection and protection program called EINSTEIN. At the same time, OMB seems to be telling agencies that what’s most important is not adhering a specific method or approach, but achieving the final result of using advanced tools and techniques to secure their systems and data.
“The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) acknowledges that there is a need to enhance existing capabilities and programs to better safeguard federal information systems and data, and we plan to convey this vision as part of the President’s 2020 Budget,” Kent writes in a Sept. 14 letter to the Senate committee. “In order to inform future investment decisions, the Department of Homeland Security’s National Protection and Programs Directorate (NPPD) is working on a threat-based security architecture assessment. This threat-based security approach, adopted from the Department of Defense, will provide a holistic assessment of existing federal cybersecurity capabilities and creates a common framework to discuss and assess cybersecurity capabilities related to threats. The results are being used to inform DHS’ cybersecurity investment priorities across federal civilian departments and agencies in order to enhance enterprise cybersecurity and reduce risk.”
The underlying message in the letter is clear. The fiscal 2020 budget request will propose more money for agencies to implement cyber capabilities more quickly and effectively whether through CDM or EINSTEIN or in other ways.
OMB goes even further in the FISMA guidance, released Oct. 25, around the need for more flexibility and accountability at the agency level.
The administration is opening the door for agencies to acquire continuous monitoring tools and capabilities outside of CDM. The memo is part of the continued evolution of CDM.
“[H]owever, they are required to provide sufficient justification should they pursue acquisition of tools with continuous monitoring capabilities that are not aligned with current or future CDM acquisition vehicles (includes CDM Dynamic and Evolving Federal Enterprise Network Defense [DEFEND], GSA IT Schedule 70 CDM Tools Special Item Number, etc.). Prior to purchasing these tools, a justification memorandum must be sent from the agency CISO to the CDM PMO, the respective OMB Resource Management Office (RMO), and the Office of the Federal Chief Information Officer (OFCIO) Cybersecurity Team,” the guidance states.
Additionally, OMB is telling agencies they can continue to use existing tools or capabilities that meet CDM requirements, but were purchased outside the contracts run by the General Services Administration.
Then if you add to what we know about the upcoming TIC guidance, the theme of moving more toward flexibility and accountability continues.
Margie Graves, the federal deputy CIO, said at the 2018 ELC conference in Philadelphia on Oct. 15 that the TIC policy will move toward a risk based approach based on the cyber framework from the National Institute of Standards and Technology.
“The policy doesn’t push us all the way to right in terms of mandating the use of controls. It opens up the aperture in terms of what commercial cloud services already are built into the environments that are meeting the controls. If it’s like-for-like, we’re not going to prescript how as long as it’s meeting the security requirements,” Grave said. “We are doing the same thing for CDM as well. If we can get to the point where we are doing continuous authorization through automated controls and automated use of data, then suddenly all the authority to operate (ATO) paperwork and approach becomes totally different. There is more veracity and more accurate because it’s based on data in the environment. That’s where we are going.”
All of these changes signal a major change in how OMB is involved with and views cybersecurity.
During most of the Obama administration, OMB passed to DHS the responsibility and some of the authority for federal cybersecurity efforts.
Part of the reason for OMB is increasing its oversight and giving agencies more flexibility may be agency frustration with the slowness of the rollout of CDM tools and capabilities as well as the perceived ineffectiveness of EINSTEIN.
In Kent’s letter to the Senate committee, she said the “National Cybersecurity Protection System (NCPS) detected 379 of the 39,171 incidents across federal civilian networks via the EINSTEIN sensor suite from April 2017 to present.” That is less than a 1 percent detection rate of all cyber incidents. This doesn’t mean EINSTEIN is ineffective, but it means the program isn’t being the proactive tool once envisioned.
Jeanette Manfra, DHS assistant secretary in the Office of Cybersecurity and Communications, said the goal this year and next is to make sure the tools under EINSTEIN are operationally relevant.
“We have been working with agencies to better understand challenges they may have in making sure how best to use the tools under the NCPS,” Manfra said in an interview on Ask the CIO. “Two areas we have been looking at for some time is can we implement some behavior analytics, looking at developments in non-signature based detection capabilities. We’ve had some success in that, what I would call a limited deployment so we will be expanding that.”
She said the goal of the non-signature based detection capabilities is looking for abnormal behavior based on a baseline of normal behavior.
She said DHS also is looking at how EINSTEIN’s on-premise model, similar to the TIC policy, integrates with cloud services.
The question that emerges from all of these changes is how can OMB and DHS ensure CDM, EINSTEIN and other cyber initiatives continue to push agencies down a similar path so there are fewer cyber breaches, unpatched vulnerabilities and a better understanding the government’s overall cyber risk while at the same time not letting the inertia of government prevent real progress?
Agencies may just remember fiscal years 2017 through 2019 as the best of times. Money was flush — generally speaking — with some agencies actually not being able to spend everything they received in 2018. Congress and the president actually got spending bills done almost on time and not six months into the fiscal year. The threat of shutdown was minor.
So as agencies finalize their 2020 budget requests—agency passback guidance usually is ready by Thanksgiving—there is a real expectation that the “do more with less” mantra will return in force.
The evidence, at least for now, is coming from multiple places. First, President Donald Trump announced he would ask each agency for a 5 percent budget cut in 2020. Deputy Defense Secretary Pat Shanahan said last week at the Military Reporter’s Conference that the Defense Department is developing two budget requests, one without the 5 percent cut and one with it.
“The way I would think about those two budgets and the approach — there are certain things that you can’t change. There are near term costs that we are going to expend in the next year that are on contract and for all intent and purposes are fixed,” Shanahan said. “There are other investments that we will make in science and technology and procurement and we have knobs in terms of timing. The exercise we are going through is there is prioritization we can make. We have a number of options going on with hypersonic missiles. In these projects we can decide to do them or to defer them.”
Shanahan said he is working with the DoD comptroller and the Office of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation (CAPE) team on what projects could be deferred, and then Secretary James Mattis will make a decision based on those trade offs.
Second is the feeling on the ground. For that, just look at the comments and expectations coming from the Professional Services Council’s 54th annual Vision Forecast. In interviews with hundreds of federal technology and acquisition officials and in analyzing spending data, PSC’s team of industry volunteers found 2019 is likely to be the “high water mark” for spending.
“There are couple of things that caused the team to look at that. Number one, is the sheer magnitude of the federal budget and the challenges we are facing in the next few years in terms of deficits, interest payments and the outlook for economic growth coming up here all tend to indicate we have about as much headroom in the budget as we can possibly stand right now,” said Lou Crenshaw, a Vision volunteer and team lead for the DoD topline and macroeconomic research. “We are starting to see pressure from OMB and other places for people to begin to reduce spending. I think part of that is the realization that we have some real serious problems we will have to deal with. I think the topline will stay the same and there may be movement between defense and non-defense because of the security situation.”
Now, of course, all of this good feeling about budget and shutdown threats could change in November if the House and/or Senate switches parties. Oh and that nasty “s” word — sequestration — could return in 2020 and beyond if Congress doesn’t raise the spending caps.
The PSC Vision Forecast — for those of you who can still make the annual conference it takes place Monday and Tuesday in Falls Church, Virginia —offered several other significant trends around technology and acquisition for 2019 and beyond. Here are just a few that stood out:
The PSC team found agencies expect to continue to increase spending on knowledge-based services and IT services spending continues to see a steady growth. But the biggest difference this year than in past surveys is the discussion around mission priorities.
“In past we’ve seen a lot of emphasis on support services, but not necessarily driving toward how they support the overall mission for the agency,” Kirste Webb, the Vision civilian chairwoman. “One of the biggest messages we are hearing across the board is that all of the agencies are now shifting to everything is about their mission, and if procurement or acquisition is not directly supporting that mission they are taking a second look at how it’s being procured and what’s being done with it.”
Webb said agencies are looking at alternative contracting practices such as Other Transaction Authority (OTAs), best-in-class contracts and sole source awards with a goal of getting to the market faster and bringing innovation to help meet mission goals better.
Interestingly, the use of shared services did not come up as an alternative or even as an option agencies are seriously considering.
The Office of Management and Budget is entering is fourth year where IT modernization is its top priority because of how everything from cybersecurity to citizen services to workforce branch off from it.
The PSC team found the discussion on IT modernization shifted from straight numbers highlighting technical debt or continued support of legacy systems to managing the IT modernization.
“It’s really about Technology Business Management. We’ve seen that changes are being attempted at an unprecedented scale across the federal enterprise. It’s going to improve the quality of the data. These are culture challenges that are extremely daunting but the outlook is promising,” said Steve Vetter, one of the two federal IT and budget Vision chairmen.
Greg Lobbin, the other federal IT and budget Vision chairman, said agencies seen an opportunity because of cloud computing to use operational expenditures (OpEx) for modernization efforts.
This may be part of the reason the impact of the Modernizing Government Technology (MGT) Act is slow to materialize. Agencies are finding ways to modernize without the need to apply for a loan from the Technology Modernization Fund, or by setting up a working capital fund.
One of the most positive changes that came from the discussions with agencies is the desire for a better working relationship with contractors.
Webb said the cautious message coming from the government is how can industry and government work to evolve the mission together.
“I think what we are seeing is agencies are trying to get industry involved earlier to avoid what’s been happening which are a lot of protests during the acquisition process. We are seeing an increased exchange across the civilian agencies in terms of industry days, industry exchanges, one-on-one opportunities well in advance of a final solicitation coming out as part of the critical steps in trying to partner more with industry across the board,” she said. “Once the acquisition is complete and a contractor is in place, agencies are recognizing working together is far better to achieve the mission.”
Webb said partnership agreements, such as those used extensively by the Department of Energy, are becoming more common.
“What we are seeing is rather than trying to fight against each other, we are seeing more going toward working with each other to resolve challenges that may occur and trying to identify potential risks and how to solve those risks before they even occur,” she said.
The best and most well-known examples of the change that PSC is highlighting are the IRS’ reverse industry days, the Homeland Security Department’s Procurement Innovation Lab’s efforts and the General Services Administration’s interact site.
Of all the trends that emerged from the 22 study teams, which conducted more than 300 interviews, the drivers of federal acquisition became clear.
Alan Chvotkin, PSC’s executive vice president and general counsel, said the President’s Management Agenda cross-agency goals continue to be the North Star that agencies are heading toward. But that also means a few other things including a tightening of the market for some vendors and an increased set of opportunities for others, particularly those in the cybersecurity and IT modernization.
“There is no doubt increased focus on IT. Cybersecurity is clearly a high risk and high spend area so we think there will be a lot of business opportunities,” he said.
Agencies are continuing to emphasize and push toward commercial services and nontraditional contractors. But, Chvotkin said, there is a mixed message because agencies also want to push government unique requirements down into the supply chain security and security clearances.
Finally, the competition for workforce talent will remain strong among industry and government alike.
PHILADELPHIA — The Federal Acquisition Service at the General Services Administration spends $100 million a year on systems that are outdated, disliked by their users and arduous to use. There is something like 70 applications that interface with the contract writing system alone.
The IRS wants to replace systems that require tens of thousands of manual hours to process basic procurement actions like contractor determinations.
The debate over the use of Other Transaction Authority remains strong over whether it’s just another tool in the procurement toolbox, or has the Defense Department discovered the “Holy Grail” of contracting because Congress gave them production authority.
All of these examples really are just symptoms to the larger disease — the need to reimagine the entire job of a contracting officer. With the move to automation happening more quickly, contracting officers soon will finally achieve the business acumen and partnership role that has been long talked about.
The good news is the change is starting to happen. One of the major themes that emerged from the 2018 ImagineNation ELC conference sponsored by ACT-IAC was around the evolution hitting the federal acquisition process.
GSA Administrator Emily Murphy said reconceiving how a contracting officer works is one of her main goals for FAS as it modernizes its schedules program by reducing the number of overall of contracts, by moving toward an unpriced schedule and pushing competition down to the task order level.
“When I’ve talked to our 1102 community and when I talk to our vendor community, one of the questions I always ask is, ‘What value are we driving from setting ceiling prices?’” Murphy said after her speech at ELC. “When we are reimaging how the schedules work, if we incorporate things like the e-commerce platform, which deals with the very low dollar value purchases, and we focus on services being an unpriced contract where we actually focus on pricing at the task order level, that frees up our 1102s. They no longer are negotiating the same ceiling prices again and again. They are instead focusing on how to make sure task order competition is real, vigorous and it’s dynamic.”
Murphy said the combination of technology, such as robotics process automation and machine learning, and business process reengineering, contracting officers can spend more time on finding the right solutions based on data and business needs.
“Think about when we awarded OASIS, it required labor hour prices per category, but it really focused a lot more on the technical qualifications of the vendors,” she said. “This gives us the ability to focus on those technical qualifications, what makes each vendor successful, unique and what can they bring to the table as a solution, instead of focusing on that contract hour price. That contract hour price becomes relatively meaningless until you get to an actual scope of work. Then you have dynamic competition at the task order level and drive down prices with a real solution behind those prices.”
To get where Murphy wants to go, FAS needs better technology that runs its assorted contracting systems.
Alan Thomas, the FAS commissioner, said its internal systems such as E-Buy, GSA Advantage, the FSS 19 and many others that make up their core business systems are expensive to maintain and not customer friendly.
Thomas and David Shive, the GSA chief information officer, are co-leading an effort to modernize and consolidate systems. He said FAS will lean on GSA’s CIO application maintenance, enhancements and operations (CAMEO) re-compete. The agency held an industry day in early August and plans to issue a request for information and hold a reverse industry day.
“We have picked the capabilities we want to have like the ability to write, modify and manage contracts or to manage catalog information, instead of modernizing system by system,” Thomas said after his panel at ELC. “Within six months, we will have the requirements for our new contracting writing system out to industry, and by the back half of 2019, we expect to begin delivering new capabilities.”
Thomas emphasized that the business system modernization effort is a multi-year strategy and it integrates with other initiatives such as schedules consolidation to reach its full potential.
Like GSA, the IRS is facing antiquated systems as well as a shrinking workforce. The tax agency spends about $2.6 billion a year on 10,000 transactions.
Tim Shaughnessy, a senior program analyst at the IRS, said a new strategic framework for the agency includes the procurement process for the first time.
“We are recognized as partners who create and buy emerging technologies and do acquisition planning,” he said at ELC. “We spend a lot of time at the end of the fiscal year trying to secure dollars early enough to set up process to buy emerging technologies.”
Shaughnessy said for the staff of 300 procurement professionals to do that more effectively, the IRS is turning to robotics process automation to reduce the amount of time spent on basic transactions.
The IRS awarded its first contract for RPA at the end of September for a bot to do contractor responsibility determinations.
“We do about 10,000 of those actions a year and the RPA is our way of dipping our toe in the RPA water,” he said. “We think this will save contracting officers about 10,000-to-15,000 FTE hours a year.”
The bot will go to public facing websites such as SAM.gov or Dun & Bradstreet to analyze data on vendors to review overall contractor financial resources, integrity and business ethics and anything that that would not otherwise exclude a vendor from bidding.
“The bot gives us the ability to quickly look at the System for Award Management (SAM) and other systems and give the contracting officer a report back on a vendor’s status,” Shaughnessy said. “The contracting officer can analyze the data that the bot brings back and pivot off that in case they need to do more investigations. We also don’t have to wait until a proposal comes in or there is an apparent winner to do a contractor responsibility determination. The bot could bring back data on all the companies who proposed.”
Along with RPA, Shaughnessy said the IRS procurement shop also is testing out a new program under Parts 12 and 13 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation to pilot emerging technologies. The IRS doesn’t have OTA authority so this is the next best thing.
Under FAR Parts 12 and 13, agencies can use streamlined evaluation procedures as long as the awards are under $7 million and it’s not to deploy new systems, and only to test and pilot.
“We haven’t picked which programs we will use this for yet. We are socializing and working with stakeholders as well as partnering with the CIO’s organization,” he said. “One of the things we are trying to do is develop, along with the CIO, a capability for us to take a concept from a white paper to initial deployment.”
Shaughnessy said one possible option is with document imaging and data capture through optical character recognition. The IRS has as many as 27 different document imaging systems. Using this pilot program, it could consolidate and modernize the entire document imaging effort.
The IRS, GSA and other agencies are making it clear the status quo around acquisition isn’t working and working within the system to change is not only possible, but happening every day. This is why the aggressive move to OTAs is disturbing to so many because instead of fixing the procurement system, like GSA, the IRS and others are trying to do, agencies are looking for a way around it.
If you wanted to track the government’s progress on IT modernization, there may not be a better approach than following the bouncing metrics of the data center consolidation initiative.
The Obama administration started out with a goal to reduce the overall number across the government. Then the Office of Management and Budget said optimization of current data centers was as important as reducing the overall number.
Then somewhere in there, OMB changed the definition of what a data center, is causing a huge increase in the overall number and a nose dive in success, followed by a quick rebound when closing a 3×3 closet with two servers counted.
Now OMB is expected to release yet another memo around data centers that, once again, will move the goal posts — whether they are forward, back or sideways it’s unclear. The data center memo is one of several expected in the coming weeks or months from OMB, which also is working on new Trusted Internet Connections (TIC) requirements and new guidance for protecting high value assets.
The good news is through the Centers of Excellence (CoE) initiative with the Agriculture Department and the move to Technology Business Management (TBM) standards, this may be the last data center memo for awhile.
Dan Pomeroy, the acting deputy associate administrator in the Office of Governmentwide Policy at the General Services Administration, said OMB recognized the government needed a new and better way to calculate costs and therefore savings when it came to data centers.
Pomeroy, who led the data center optimization initiative as well as the infrastructure optimization CoE before taking on this new role in September, said GSA worked with USDA to come up with eight categories to calculate the costs of data centers.
“We are looking at things like the cost of labor that will continue, but maybe it will be less as you reduce the number of data centers,” Pomeroy said. “We are asking what can you save across multiple parameters? Based on the square footage of a data center, there are different levels of savings. If you shut down a closet, there will be less savings then if you shut down a tier 3 data center.”
At the same time, GSA is ensuring the data center metrics are integrating with the TBM cost towers process. OMB is requiring agencies to implement TBM by 2022 under the President’s Management Agenda and as part of its effort to improve the capital planning and investment control (CPIC) processes.
Pomeroy said agencies needed a tool set to calculate savings and return on investment, and whose data would easily fit into the TBM structure.
USDA will further test out these new metrics as part of its effort to close 39 data centers under the CoE initiative. The agency already closed 21 data centers and expects to save $6.9 million to $8.5 million a year.
On the other side of the IT modernization spectrum is the Social Security Administration. While SSA remained dogged by antiquated systems and processes, IT modernization is happening in some pockets.
For example, SSA expects most states to move to its new and improved Disability Case Processing System (DCPS) by the end of fiscal 2019. The DCPS rollout stands out as a major project in SSA’s five-year, $700 million IT modernization strategy, which it launched last year.
Rajive Mathur, the SSA CIO, said he’s borrowing an approach from his industry days where IT capabilities are based on a business-centric view.
To that end, Mathur said he’s implementing a product management and product manager approach across SSA’s IT efforts.
Mathur said a product owner asks the business or program managers questions such as: What is the strategy? How do we deliver on value? What are the planned product versions?
“We are not investing in a one-year, one product program. It will always be a multi-year view where we are creating value and delivering new capabilities early and often” Mathur said at the conference. “There is a big culture change I’m asking for by moving to product management.”
Mathur said under this approach, the program office and CIO’s office will develop a one-page outline of the project plan, which includes funding, current spend rate, team structure, timeline for delivery of capabilities, any market research and other data that will lead us to a buy or build decision.
This concept is not necessarily new. CIOs over the years have moved toward having business or program connections in their offices. But what Mathur is doing come more from the venture capital world where companies are held to specific metrics to produce results.
Mathur said the product manager is like a mini-CEO who knows everything about their program.
“This is IT modernization at different levels where we are changing the relationships with the business offices,” he said. “The product function is in the CIO shop today, but over time I’d like to migrate it to the business shops.”
|Nov 16, 2018||Close||Change||YTD*|
Closing price updated at approx 6pm ET each business day. More at tsp.gov
* YTD data is updated on the last day of the month.