


Voting machines: Near-term procurements; mobile election future
Nathan said: Yes, with the rapid pace of technological evolution and what appears to be our "Thirst" to...
[More]
Computer-aided dispatch in the cloud
James Cape said: The Public Safety Cloud is already here. InterAct's Online RMS is serving the needs of over 200 age...
[More]
Colorado joins Montana in requiring vendor proposals submitted on iPads
George Gotsis said: What I find interesting is how often states still require printed copies. You don't need an iPad to ...
[More]



Based on early reviews of the 2014 budget request, it appears agency efforts to improve cybersecurity will receive continued attention for the foreseeable future. Considering the As part of the executive order for cybersecurity, the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) was given the responsibility for developing a cybersecurity framework. The first in a series of workshops on developing this “living framework” was held in Washington, D.C. on April 3, 2013. Much of the discussion revolved around risk management and the role of industry in identifying best practices. (Not surprisingly, these are issues that government agencies have been facing too.)



Now the budget is in the hands of Congress, which has historically appropriated more for IT than what the President requests. With fiscal priorities clashing and sequestration impacts now being felt across the market, federal IT could weather the current fiscal storm in relatively good shape.
Today President Obama delivered a $3.8 trillion spending plan to Congress which includes a $1.2 trillion request in discretionary funding levels and nearly $82 billion for information technology for FY2014. The budget focuses on jobs creation, economic growth and to strengthen the American middle class.
The budget proposal also includes $1.8 trillion in additional deficit reduction measures over 10 years to reach a total deficit reduction of $4.3 trillion. The proposed deficit actions would reduce the deficit to 2.8%of GDP by 2016.
Additionally, the budget proposes $400 billion in cuts to health programs including Medicare. Savings and cuts would come from negotiating better prescription drug prices, fighting waste and fraud, and requiring the wealthiest seniors to pay more.
The table below shows the FY2013 enacted budget levels and the proposed FY2014 levels.

Other budget highlights:
The president’s budget proposes nearly $82 billion in IT funding, a 1.8% increase from the FY 2013 CR and a 2.1% increase over FY 2012 estimated level.

IT-related budget highlights:
All told, the president’s budget request includes 215 cuts, consolidations, and savings proposals, which according to the administration, are projected to save more than $25 billion in FY2014. The budget proposal outlines the administration’s priorities and proposed methods for generating more revenue, cutting costs, and reducing the deficit. However, it joins competing budget plans in the House and Senate. Serious Capitol Hill budget negotiations are not likely to take place until this summer.

If this simple analysis holds even close to reality the potential remaining total contract obligations across all federal departments and agencies could be over $300 billion in Q3 and Q4, or 70% of total FY 2013 contract obligations. The second half of fiscal 2013 could potentially see federal contract dollars really flow.
|
Contract Status Key |
|
|
● |
Moving Forward |
|
● |
On Hold |
|
X |
Cancelled |
|
○ |
Contracting Office Not Commenting |
|
* |
Small Business Opportunity |
Note: GovWin IQ login is required to view the reports at the Opportunity ID hyperlinks below.
Agency Program/Account Value Opportunity ID Status Air Force Training System Acquisition Program (TSA III) $20.9 B ● Air Force * Engineering Professional Administrative Support Services (EPASS) $5.0 B ● Air Force *Network-Centric Solutions (NETCENTS II A&AS) $710 M ● Air Force * Technical Data Support Services (TDSS(e)) $467 M ● Air Force *Follow On Third Party Logistics Services for Support Equipment Commodity Council (3PL SECC) $288 M ● Army Train Educate and Coach (TEACH) $8.0 B ● Army Space and Missile Defense Technology Design Development Demonstration and Integration (D3I) $4.9 B ● Army Strategic Service Solutions (S3) $4.0 B ● Army Utility Monitoring and Control Systems for Heating Venting and Air Conditioning (UMCS IV) (HVAC) $2.5 B ● Army Technical Information Engineering Services (TIES) $995 M ● Army Energy Savings Performance Contracts (ESPC III) $1.5 B ● Army *Information Management Communications Services (IMCS 3) $500 M ● Commerce * Patent Office Support Services (PTOSS IV) $252 M ● Education Common Services for Borrowers (CSB) $2.3 B X GSA One Acquisition Solution for Integrated Services (OASIS) $12.0 B ● HHS Health Marketing Communications Services (HMCS) $870 M ● HHS Chief Information Officer Commodity Solutions (CIO-CS) $10.0 B ● NASA Solutions for Enterprisewide Procurement (SEWP V) $20.0 B ● NASA Center Maintenance Operations and Engineering (CMOE) $971 M ● NASA * Marshall Engineering Technicians and Trade Support Services (METTS) $151 M ● State Passport Support Services (PSP) $570 M ● State * Hybrid Information Technology Services for State (HITSS II) $2.1 B ○ USAID Encouraging Global Anticorruption and Good Governance Efforts (ENGAGE) $750 M ● Defense Global Network Services (GNS) --- ● Defense Defense Systems Technical Area Tasks (DS) (TATs) $3.0 B ● Defense Homeland Defense and Security Technical Area Tasks (HD TATs) $900 M ● Defense * Special Operational Equipment Tailored Vendor Logistics Support Program $5.7 B ● DHS BiowatchGen 3 $3.1 B ● Navy Rapid Response Irregular Warfare (RR/IW) $5.0 B ● Navy Consolidated Afloat Network and Enterprise Services Full Deployment Production Units (CANES) $1.0 B ●
Source: Deltek
In some cases, agency officials indicated that sequestration is not expected to have an immediate impact on their contract. Future delays in funding, however, could be a possibility. Certainly, agencies are prioritizing programs, complying with mandates and, in some cases, restructuring their efforts. Program cancellations, however, seem to be in the minority.

These top 5 categories account for 87% of all incidents reported by federal agencies. Factoring out the Non Cyber category, the remaining top 4 make up nearly 60% of all reported federal security incidents. (See chart below.)
Delving into the data a bit further shows where these incidents are most widely occurring among the 15 departments spending the most on their IT security, according to their FISMA submissions. (See table below.)
Implications
While a data comparison among categories and agencies has its limitations, it does lead us to ask further questions and draw some possible conclusions. The most obvious to me is noticing the clustering of incidents within categories that relate to internal behaviors.
Combining the frequency of Policy Violations, lost or stolen Equipment, and Non-Cyber (non-digital) incidents consisting of the physical spillage or mishandling of PII in paper form drives home that there appears to be much left to do in the area of cybersecurity training for IT users at these departments. If the Malicious Code category accounts for much in the way of code insertion through unsafe user practices then that incident frequency too underscores the ongoing training need. OMB notes in the report that federal agencies spent less than 1% of their IT security budgets in FY 2012 on training. In previous FISMA reports training accounted for roughly 2.5% in FY 2010 and FY 2011, but according to OMB, the DOD portion of the data for those years was incomplete so adjusting for DOD might show that 1% is consistent across all of these years.
The sheer number of departments in the top 15 above that list Policy Violations and/or Equipment incidents in their top 2 or 3 for frequency suggests that some of the greatest information security challenges facing federal agencies are internal – whether through lack of awareness or training or through outright disregard for approved security practices. In a fiscally constrained environment where return on investment for each dollar is scrutinized agencies might actually save money that they would spend on cleaning up security mistakes by users if they could more effectively prevent many of these incidents in the first place.
---
Originally published for Federal Industry Analysis: Analysts Perspectives Blog. Stay ahead of the competition by discovering more about GovWin FIA. Follow me on Twitter @GovWinSlye.
This week the Congress passed a fiscal year (FY) 2013 funding bill that provides budgets for a handful of federal departments and continuing resolution (CR) level funding for the remaining departments and agencies through the end of fiscal 2013 on September 30. The final bill averts the potential for a government shutdown and funds key priorities while leaving intact the sequestration rules set under the Budget Control Act (BCA).
---
Originally published for Federal Industry Analysis: Analysts Perspectives Blog. Stay ahead of the competition by discovering more about GovWin FIA. Follow on twitter @GovWinFIA.