GovWin
 
 
A Wisconsin turnaround: Reality v. Rhetoric

Written by: Joanna Salini, Stephen Moss and Alexandra Howden

In his 2013 budget address, Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker outlined a clear and concise vision for the coming biennium: more prosperity, better performance and true independence. Based on Deltek’s cross-vertical analysis (below), it is clear that Walker’s vision is on display, though perhaps not as ideally as his budget address reads.
 
The economic condition in Wisconsin has improved exponentially since its $4 billion deficit and unemployment rate of nearly 8 percent in 2011. Now, America’s Dairyland has mounted a comeback toward a budget surplus, and unemployment is almost a point less than the national average. In these favorable conditions, the governor has focused his attention on maintaining and improving core government functions – most notably, corrections, K-12 education, and Medicaid.
 
From FY 2013 to FY 2014, the governor’s recommended budget increased by 8 percent, while the budget for corrections and education only increased by 0.2 percent and 3.4 percent, respectively. Medicaid outpaced overall budget growth with a 14 percent year-over-year increase.
 
In line with a focus on better performance, Governor Walker’s budgetary priority of investing in correctional infrastructure sounds promising, but the reality might be quite different. In efforts to reaffirm the state’s commitment to public safety, Walker highlighted plans to improve and expand the state’s criminal justice system, which includes ensuring that all resources are used effectively to provide oversight of correctional facilities and its operations, as well as ensuring that all IT systems are up to date with the latest enhancements. Current systems in place within the Department of Corrections are antiquated and could potentially compromise the safety of those imprisoned as well as those released on electronic monitoring devices.

The Department of Corrections (DOC) manages 18 correctional institutions, 16 correctional centers for adults, two holds facilities, and two correctional institutions for juveniles. Wisconsin’s prison population is expected to grow by the end of 2015 by roughly 3 percent; therefore, per-capital annual inmate costs are also expected to increase. Rise in prison populations are also coupled with an increase in the number of offenders subject to GPS monitoring through community corrections programs. The number of tracked offenders is expected to grow by approximately 37.5 percent by the end of 2015.
 
The DOC has been plagued with insufficient funding and FTE positions available to accommodate these projected increases; therefore, new commitments have been made to fund positions and provide solutions to upgrade department-wide integrated justice information systems. While Governor Walker projects departmental budget increases for IT purposes, the overall budget does not accurately reflect this projection. Instead, the budget for DOC remains relatively stagnant with a slight decrease (less than 1 percent) in departmental expenditures, which indicates the DOC is more focused on maintaining current operations.
 
Other notable justice/public safety and homeland security projects in the state of Wisconsin include a Department of Corrections livescan fingerprint system and driver’s license identification card issuance and production for the Department of Transportation.
 
Governor Walker started off the year making some lofty promises. In his 2013 budget address, he repeatedly expressed the importance of education in the upcoming fiscal year and the need to provide all children a better and more equal education, as well as more affordable options for higher education. Walker directly related education to the developing workforce: “Our educational institutions need to be focused on, and held accountable to, the education of the next generation’s workforce.”
 
The governor continued to stress the direct correlation between an educated youth and a successful workforce. With an “ever-changing labor market for manufacturing, technology, and health care” as the landscape, Walker insists investing in higher education today will result in a stronger workforce and economy tomorrow.
 
“Beyond traditional educational investments, we will make smart, targeted, performance-based investments in our University of Wisconsin System, the Wisconsin Technical College System and traditional K-12 education to ensure our citizens have the skills needed for the jobs of today and tomorrow,” he said in his budget address.
In the Budget in Brief, Governor Walker laid out a 17-step plan for transforming education, which includes providing funding for academic and career planning software, promoting a new educator effectiveness system, and parental input systems for lower-performing schools.
 
All of these initiatives seem well and good, correct? Well, as the old parable goes, actions speak louder than words. While Governor Walker did increase the K-12 education budget from FY 13, he decreased spending from the agency’s request. In the Wisconsin FY 2014-2015 Educational Communications Board budget, the General Purpose Revenue Fund agency request increased by $151,700 for FY 2014, yet the governor’s recommendation decreased by $105,900. This not only denies the agency request for an increase necessary for the projected year, but falls $257,600 below the requested amount. All the while, the federal revenue remains constant, so there is no aid to new projects.
 
Governor Walker did stick to his promises by increasing the program revenue budget. While an increase of $562,400 was requested, the governor increased it by $567,900. This will allow a little extra room to grow projects or even add a few new measures. Additionally, Walker added a performance-based funding incentive to encourage schools to perform better and potentially earn $30,000 a year.
 
Total spending for education increased by 3.4 percent, which leaves room for some of these lofty goals to be accomplished. It may not be feasible to accomplish all of them in the fiscal year, but it will lead Wisconsin in the direction of more prosperity.
 
Critical to attaining the goal of true independence is the governor’s plan for state-administered entitlements. This independence rests on his budgetary pronouncements regarding the optional expansion of Medicaid contained within the pages of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Walker, like many governors across the United States, chose not to opt-in to the ACA Medicaid expansion requirements. That expansion to eligibility for individuals at 138 percent of the federal-poverty level would affect the state’s bottom line to varying degrees in the near term.
 
According to sources including the Legislative Fiscal Bureau, expansion of Medicaid eligibility would actually save the state $65 million; however, the Kaiser Family Foundation fixes the bill at $725 million over the next nine years. With such varying information and the logically inconsistent position that adding millions to an entitlement program would save the state money, Walker opted for a middle-ground position. 
 
Citing the unreliability of a federal government saddled with a $16.5 trillion debt that grows daily, and the virtue of an independent and free populace unencumbered by dependence on government, the governor opted for a slight expansion of Medicaid to include all impoverished Wisconsinites by lifting the enrollment cap for childless adults. This plan would make 82,000 more individuals eligible. However, the governor also places emphasis on the health insurance exchange as critical to reducing the number of uninsured individuals in the state. With the exchange, 87,000 people currently on Medicaid would be eligible for subsidized insurance through the exchange or a private plan. The net effect would be a reduction of the total number of Medicaid enrollees by 5,000, with a simultaneous reduction in the number of insured by 224,580.
As with all political statements, the Medicaid priorities espoused by Governor Walker must be examined within the context of the actual numbers proposed in his budget draft. As part of Deltek’s analysis of the Wisconsin budget, Medicaid spending was collected from FY 2006 through FY 2015. That data shows a 72 percent increase in proposed Medicaid spending – an increase from the FY 2011-2013 biennium of 14 percent per year. As with many other states, Medicaid spending is a main driver in funding growth and far outpaces the 8 percent increase from the FY 11-12 biennium to the FY 14-15 biennium.
 
Also on par with other states, Medicaid accounts for nearly a fourth of the entire state budget. For the past two biennia, that number (approximately 21 percent) has been holding steady, but is expected to rise to 22 percent of the total budget through FY 13-15. The governor’s decision to reduce the overall enrollment in Medicaid while covering more citizens through the use of insurance exchanges seems to be a responsible budgetary move that will allow the state more freedom and flexibility. For the purposes of analysis, it is too early to evaluate the governor’s cost-saving claims.
 
The economic position of Wisconsin has undoubtedly improved over the last few years; however, it has been described by some as still treading water. The budget proposal submitted by Governor Walker for the 2014-15 biennium reflects this reality, which bodes well for vendors conducting future business with the state.
 
Wisconsin has outlined an extensive list of opportunities that will most likely come to fruition in the coming years. The preceding vertical analysis of the corrections, education and health care markets provides an excellent in-depth backdrop by which vendors may position themselves toward achieving the Walker administration’s goals: more prosperity, better performance and true independence. 
 
Vendor Takeaways:
  • There is a focus on corrections, education, and Medicaid in the upcoming fiscal year.
  • Detailed projects (as outlined above) have been forecasted for the year.
  • The governor's increase in budget will allow for bountiful procurement in the state.
Not a Deltek subscriber? Click here to learn more about Deltek’s GovWin IQ database and take advantage of a free trial. Also, click here for an in-depth analysis on State Correction Market Trends for 2013.

Hawaii's FY 2013-2015 Biennium Budget

In his FY 2013-2015 Executive Biennium Budget, Hawaii Governor Neil Abercrombie highlighted the daunting challenges that faced his administration during the last biennium, including a $1.3 billion potential budget shortfall that threatened deep programmatic cuts to department operations statewide. The governor utilized a fiscal strategy to only address pressing needs while investing in the state’s future, with goals to improve government efficiency and transparency. For this biennium, Hawaii’s gross domestic product (GDP) is expected to increase by 2.4 percent in 2013, while unemployment rates continue to decrease.

The new biennium budget (seen above in Figure 1) has several areas of investment, including:

  • Early learning and early childhood health
  • Education IT and digital curriculums
  • Increased resources for Hawaii’s aging population
  • Environmental sustainability and protection

The biggest gains by department from FY 2013-2014 include the Department of Human Services ($309 million), Department of Budget and Finance ($251 million), and Department of Transportation ($52 million). The Department of Hawaiian Home Lands saw a budget decrease of $140 million. Investments for FY 2014-2015 include $151 million for the Department of Human Services and $91 million for the Department of Budget and Finance.

Although the numbers in Figure 2 look as if Hawaii has invested millions in information technology, the numbers actually represent more transparency into Hawaii’s IT reporting. Deltek was able to gather more data on the total value of IT projects in the state for the biennium budget. Health IT was a major investment, including $2 million for its health information exchange (HIE), $45 million for Medicaid IT initiatives, and $15 million for an electronic medical record (EMR) system. The Department of Taxation is also investing nearly $32 million into its tax system modernization project for FY 2013-2015.

Despite tough times that followed the economic recession, Hawaii has laid the groundwork for a stable foundation and is continuing to increase both its GDP and IT spending. Vendors working in the education, health, and environmental space should check out Deltek’s analysis on Hawaii’s budget here, and brush up on the Aloha State in our state profile application. For a free trial, please click here.

Georgia's FY 2014 Budget

Despite a financially cautious approach, Georgia Governor Nathan Deal proposed an additional $2.1 billion to the FY 2014 budget compared to FY 2013, bringing total spending to $40.8 billion for the coming fiscal year.

 

The governor wants the FY 2014 budget to focus on eliminating waste, streamlining government operations, stimulating economic growth, and preparing for economic uncertainties. While most agencies’ base spending is reduced in FY 2014, investments will continue in key areas of health care and education. Governor Deal has defined health care as the largest cost driver in Georgia’s recent budgets, and that increased Medicaid expenses will require an additional $246 million in both FY 2013 and FY 2014 over current funding levels.

 

 

True to his word, the governor increased the Georgia Department of Community Health’s budget by $888 million, and the Department of Education saw an increase of $812 million. The University System of the Georgia Board of Regents also received a healthy increase of $220 million. The average reduced funding for departments was pretty minimal – the highest being a $23 million decrease for the Technical College System, and an $8 million decrease for the Office of the Governor.

 

 

Unlike states that report proposed IT budgets alongside new fiscal budgets, Georgia only reports actual IT expenditures from the year prior. The data collected for FY 2012 also reflects a change in IT reporting methodology. In previous years, project portfolio amounts were included, but those amounts are no longer included in an effort to ensure more consistent reporting and to better compare IT spending with other states.

 

It is also important to note that some state entities with large IT expenditures expected, like the University System of Georgia, are not required to report. Only 80 percent of required agencies reported in FY 2012, with just 41 agencies having a commissioner signature on their proposals. Due to the reporting style of Georgia’s IT spending, FY 2013 and FY 2014 are projected by Deltek.

 

Despite a cautious outlook on state and national futures, Georgia maintains a steady spending rate in its total fiscal budgets. The Georgia Technology Authority (GTA) has made several new investments in recent years, and its current momentum is self-described as the nation’s largest state IT modernization. GTA officials said the primary focus in FY 2012 was building strong partnerships with the state’s strategic IT service delivery partners in support of collaboration; this is expected to continue in the years ahead.

 

For more information on Georgia FY 2014 budget, visit the state profile here.

Deltek releases annual state-of-the-states analysis: Webinar to be held this Thursday

Every year, Deltek analysts carefully comb through all 50 governors’ state-of-the-state and budget addresses to identity crucial trends in rising and falling priorities. Understandably, the past few years haven’t been so fruitful, with states cutting key programs, canceling major projects and shifting efforts to stay afloat amid recession’s strapped-budget undertow.
 
Fortunately, states are successfully weathering the storm, and this year’s report contains a bevy of potential vendor opportunities as governors’ agendas increased project items for the first time since 2008. Overall, the total number of governor agenda items rose a sharp 11.6 percent from 2012.
 
In addition to the report, Deltek is presenting a free webinar this Thursday at 2 p.m. EST so vendors can learn how to align technologies with current and emerging policy trends. Go here to register for the free event.
 
Major take-aways from “State of the States, 2013,” include:
  • Governors’ renewed interest in performance-based management, particularly in education
  • More effort to cut corrections and incarceration costs by investing in probation, parole and electronic monitoring programs
  • Heavy focus on Medicaid expansion (both for and against), and how to reduce its costs
  • Increased dedication to developing a strong future workforce by establishing a wealth of present educational opportunities, led by digital learning platforms
  • Amplified justice and public safety initiatives due to natural disasters (Hurricane Sandy) and national tragedies (the Newtown shootings)
  • Continued plans to streamline and consolidate government operations through technology
The report also breaks down governors’ 2013 goals per vertical market, with several charts detailing the number of agenda items mentioned year to year and technology-specific projects.

The full list of report graphs include:
  • 2013 by vertical
  • 2011-2013 comparison by vertical
  • 2008-2013 average by vertical
  • 2013 Agenda Item Popularity vs. 2011-2013 average by vertical
  • Top 25 cross-over agenda items
  • Agenda items with mention of technology, 2013
  • Agenda items mentioned by state, 2013
  • Community development, economic development/regulation, natural resources/environment, and transportation agenda items, 2013
  • Education agenda items, 2013
  • General government services and public finance agenda items, 2013
  • Health care and social services agenda items, 2013
  • Justice/public safety agenda items, 2013
To read the full, 33-page report, please go here. Deltek clients that subscribe to State & Local Industry Analysis (SLIA) may also request (via their Deltek Client Advisor) the Excel workbook containing all of the agenda data compiled for the report.
Lastly, please register for our free webinar this Thursday to learn more about the initiatives and implications of 2013’s state-of-the-state addresses.

 

Michigan's FY 2014-2015 Budget

Michigan Governor Rick Snyder is utilizing his fiscal year 2014-2015 budget to highlight Michigan as the nation’s “comeback state,” calling for both fiscally responsible and innovative spending to ensure a bright future. With no big surprises, education, health care reform, and transportation are among the state’s top investment priorities. More than 75 percent of the budget is dedicated to education and health and human services, and state spending will go hand in hand with outcome measures and performance metrics.

 

 

The FY 2014 budget totals $51.8 billion, a 7 percent increase from FY 2013. The FY 2015 proposed budget tops $53 billion. Table 1 below represents the total budget starting in FY 2010.

 

Michigan’s FY2014-2015 budget is spot on with Governor Snyder’s goals to increase better health outcomes, education, and transportation for Michigan citizens. Touted as the “comeback state,” Michigan is turning a corner as employment rates and personal income rise. The unemployment rate is decreasing faster than the national average, and the housing market is starting to gain momentum. Further, the governor has called for a focus on long-term solutions and assistance for struggling local entities. For a deeper dive into the state’s budget, please click here for an Analyst Perspective (log-in required).

 

Deltek is currently tracking more than 30 core-IT opportunities in the state of Michigan, valued at an estimated $3.3 billion. Vendors interested in forming a partnership with the “comeback state” should visit our Michigan state profile to access procurement information, budget documents, and key contacts.

 

 

Federal FY 2014 IT Budget to Grow, but there’s Winners and Losers

Steven VanRoekel, U.S. Chief Information Officer at the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) released a presentation yesterday outlining the Obama Administration’s FY 2014 Information Technology priorities and budget numbers. The bottom line is that they are seeking 2% growth in the overall IT budget year-over-year, but individual department budget changes vary widely, meaning that there are “winners” and “losers.”
 
Preceding the public release of his presentation, VanRoekel posted a series of tweets on Twitter under the theme: All you need to know about the IT budget in 10 tweets. You can find the series under #FedITx10, but here they are in the descending order in which they appeared:
 
10-Flat or declining. IT=$82B in the 2014 Budget 2.1% increase from FY12, flat, 0.78% CAGR since 09, negative adjusted for inflation
9-Cut & Reinvest: Now more than ever we must use IT to drive savings to fund innovations that change how govt works
8-Priorities: IT priorities in 2014Budget: Innovate. Deliver. Protect. Evidence
7-Innovate: 2014 Budget enables the Digital Gov Strategy to build a 21st century govt, increase mobile services and Open Data
6-Deliver: PortfolioStat = +$2.5B in savings through IT consolidations and upgrades (over 3yrs)
5-Protect: Over $15B of the IT 2014 Budget is going to enhance our Nation’s cybersecurity
4-Evidence: 2014 Budget NEW evidence-based innovation initiative in my office to strengthen evaluations & drive results, beyond IT
3-Innovate with Less: Since 09 we flattened IT $ while FY01-FY09 IT increased ~2x At that rate, we’d be at +$110B on IT today
2-Dogfood: For geeks (like me!) interested in an Open Data 2014 Budget, key tables in XML here:
1-Progress: 2014 Budget enables strategic IT investment for a 21st century govt, drives innovation & protects our national assets
 
IT Budget “Winners” and “Losers”
 
The budget submission information included in VanRoekel’s presentation contains some top-line budget numbers which allows for some initial analysis. The IT budget summary table in the presentation calculates the amount and percentage change for FY 2014 based on FY 2012 budgets, even though he provides FY 2013 Continuing Resolution (CR) budget estimates that are different. To provide a more detailed perspective I ran the numbers comparing the dollar and percentage change for all scenarios. 
 
The tables below are grouped by the “Winners” and “Losers” based on the percentage change from FY 2012 to FY 2014. The third table provides a comparison between Defense and Civilian segments, along with total federal IT.
 
 
 
 
 
 
Conclusion
 
While we are still waiting for the release of detailed IT budget information from OMB the proposed $1.4 or $1.7 billion increase for FY 2014, depending on which baseline year you use, is sure to surprise many who watch this market. Certainly, a 2% yearly growth rate is anemic compared to the growth rates we have seen over the last decade or so. (OMB reports a 7.09% compound annual growth rate (CAGR) between FY 2001 and FY 2009 and they are projecting a 0.78% CAGR between FY 2009 and FY 2014) Yet, many expected lower growth – if not an outright decline – in the federal IT budget for this coming fiscal year.  

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.

---
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.

Surviving Sequestration: The 2nd Half of FY 2013 Could See $300 Billion in Federal Contract Dollars

Increasingly, we hear from companies in the federal marketplace that they struggle to plan and forecast their business prospects. There have been so many delays, false starts, and misaligned priorities that it is sometimes hard to know what opportunities are real and how to position your firm to compete. Now, the impacts of sequestration are beginning to ripple through an already skittish market, adding to the uncertainty. Yet, there are some things to consider that might indicate the contracting potential for the rest of fiscal 2013 and beyond.
Whenever things get unbearably uncertain it is important to have access to good data and information, plus a little creative thinking. It is the only way I know how to keep from making reactionary decisions and to get into proactive mode. So when it comes to thinking about the business prospects for the remainder of fiscal year (FY) 2013 it helps to build some historical context.
To get a sense of the historical pace and relative magnitude of federal spending for the remaining two fiscal quarters of 2013 I looked at the reported quarterly contract obligations across the federal government for the last five years. As I have noted in the past, we have seen a shift in federal spending to later and later in the fiscal year. Spending in Q1 and Q2 (in varying degrees) has shifted to Q3 and Q4. Even with some yearly fluctuation, the trend has been fairly stable. (See chart below.)
These shifts have occurred during a period where we have seen increasing use of continuing resolutions (CR), omnibus appropriations and other delays to funding federal agencies. FY 2013 is not particularly unique in this respect, so it does not seem unreasonable to conclude that the trend will hold this year as well. 
Projected Spending for the Rest of FY 2013 – a Possible Scenario
Now that we have received data for the first two quarters of FY 2013 it becomes possible to perform some rough projections of what might be still on the table for Q3 and Q4. I used FY 2012 data as a basis to make these projections. For FY 2012, adding together Q1 and Q2 departmental obligations and then dividing that sum by the department’s total obligations gave me the relative percentage of total obligations that occurred in Q1 and Q2. (See the table below for the top 20 federal departments and agencies.)
Assuming that agency contracted spending in FY 2013 will be at least 90% of what it was in FY 2012 (sequestration may represent about a 7% cut, so this 10% difference seemed reasonable to me) I followed a similar approach to calculate estimates for Q1 and Q2 percentages and potential remaining obligations for the remainder of FY 2013. 
For example, in the table below the Army had combined FY 2012 Q1 and Q2 obligations of $41.6 billion, which was 38% of their total FY 2012 obligations. The Army had a total of $17.8 billion in contract obligations for Q1 and Q2 of FY 2013, which represents 18% of the projected potential total FY 2013 spend, using my 90% of FY’12 assumption. Applying the percentage left over (i.e. 82%) to my total FY 2013 estimate results in a potential remaining obligation balance for Q3 and Q4 of $79.6 billion for the Army.
 
Granted, performing estimates at this macro level has its limitations and it requires certain broad assumptions for consistency, like a comparable year-over-year obligation rate and that, to some degree, these expenditures are for recurring needs. Some departments have a measure of cyclicality that is underrepresented in a chart covering just a few years. For example, Energy tends to run cyclically between 40% and 68% for Q1 and Q2 every other year or so like a pendulum. Further analysis into the specific contracts is needed to understand why.
Implications
Comparing the 2012 and 2013 percentages reveals that nearly all of the top 20 departments are behind in obligating funds, even with an assumed 10% reduction in spending from FY 2012. While the one-two punch of delayed budgets and sequestration might explain much of this it still remains that these agencies will need to obligate their remaining budgets by the end of the fiscal year. Even (or especially) in this uncertain budgetary environment, agencies will not likely leave money unspent. It is still a “use it or lose it” world out there. So there may likely be some significant pent-up demand that we could see play out in the remaining two quarters.

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.

Surviving Sequestration: Over $116 Billion in Contracting Opportunities on the Horizon

Despite the emphasis the tighter budgets agencies face under sequestration, major contract opportunities are continuing to move forward. The sum total for 28 upcoming contracts is $116.142 billion. Of course, small businesses won’t be left out in the cold. Of that total, close to some $17 billion will for be small businesses awards.

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

37291

 Air Force

* Engineering Professional Administrative Support Services (EPASS)

$5.0 B

93515

Air Force

*Network-Centric Solutions (NETCENTS II A&AS)

$710 M

48254

Air Force

* Technical Data Support Services (TDSS(e))

$467 M

78427

Air Force

*Follow On Third Party Logistics Services for Support Equipment Commodity Council (3PL SECC)

$288 M

92288

Army

Train Educate and Coach (TEACH)

$8.0 B

69254

Army

Space and Missile Defense Technology Design Development Demonstration and Integration (D3I)

$4.9 B

54159

Army

Strategic Service Solutions (S3)

$4.0 B

86280

Army

Utility Monitoring and Control Systems for Heating Venting and Air Conditioning

(UMCS IV) (HVAC)

$2.5 B

80441

Army

Technical Information Engineering Services (TIES)

$995 M

69356

Army

Energy Savings Performance Contracts (ESPC III)

$1.5 B

78525

Army

*Information Management Communications Services (IMCS 3)

$500 M

72006

Commerce

* Patent Office Support Services (PTOSS IV)

$252 M

32547

Education

Common Services for Borrowers (CSB)

$2.3 B

33550

X

GSA

One Acquisition Solution for Integrated Services (OASIS)

$12.0 B

90928

HHS

Health Marketing Communications Services (HMCS)

$870 M

67831

HHS

Chief Information Officer Commodity Solutions

(CIO-CS)

$10.0 B

47886

NASA

Solutions for Enterprisewide Procurement (SEWP V)

$20.0 B

82396

NASA

Center Maintenance Operations and Engineering (CMOE)

$971 M

53636

NASA

* Marshall Engineering Technicians and Trade Support Services (METTS)

$151 M

53603

State

Passport Support Services (PSP)

$570 M

64443

State

 * Hybrid Information Technology Services for State (HITSS II)

$2.1 B

49544

USAID

Encouraging Global Anticorruption and Good Governance Efforts (ENGAGE)

$750 M

83090

Defense

Global Network Services (GNS)

---

86970

Defense

Defense Systems Technical Area Tasks (DS) (TATs)

$3.0 B

48780

Defense

Homeland Defense and Security Technical Area Tasks (HD TATs)

$900 M

48776

Defense

* Special Operational Equipment Tailored Vendor Logistics Support Program

$5.7 B

70506

DHS

BiowatchGen 3

$3.1 B

68486

Navy

Rapid Response Irregular Warfare (RR/IW)

$5.0 B

67883

Navy

Consolidated Afloat Network and Enterprise Services Full Deployment Production Units (CANES)

$1.0 B

50287

Source: Deltek

Many of Deltek’s opportunity analysts have reported that contracting offices have been unable to comment on the precise impact of sequestration their programs. Contractors will want to monitor changes in requirements and scheduling as the precise impact of sequestration becomes clearer.

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.

Investing in core functions: Pennsylvania’s FY 2014 budget spurs economic growth

With an overall increase of just more than 4.5 percent, Pennsylvania Governor Corbett’s $66.7 billion fiscal year (FY) 2014 budget shows signs of increasing economic strength for the commonwealth. Major reform initiatives include selling the state liquor system to invest in education, modernizing Pennsylvania’s transportation infrastructure and overhauling state pension systems. The sale of the state liquor system is anticipated to generate $1 billion and will fund the Passport for Learning Block Grant for school districts that can use the funding to enhance access to science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) programs as well as for other initiatives.


From a vertical standpoint, health care, primary and secondary education and justice and public safety all saw increases hovering around 5 percent. The increase in health care can be attributed to expansion of services for disabled and older Pennsylvanians and children, and increased funding for state health centers. According to Acting Secretary of Health Michael Wolf, “In Pennsylvania, two million people live in communities that the federal government has designated as medically underserved.” 

 

Table 1: Pennsylvania Total Fiscal Year IT Line Items Budget

 

Overall spending on information technology projects increased 15 percent from FY 2013, much of which was designated toward general departmental IT modernization efforts, including shared service delivery under the Office of Enterprise Technology Services. The Technology Innovation Investment Fund received $7.7 million for enterprise and agency-specific innovation initiatives. The Governor’s Innovation Office has also prioritized specific IT projects in FY 2014 include the streamlining of print, imaging and mail operations, and implementation of electronic grants processing, which are expected to save the state $7 million and $50 million, respectively.

 

For a full analysis of Pennsylvania’s FY 2014 budget, see Deltek’s analysis, available here.

Not a Deltek subscriber? Learn more and sign up for a free trial here

Congress Passes FY 2013 Funding – No Shutdown, Sequestration Intact

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).

When all was said and done, the House passed a Senate amended version of the original H.R. 933 House funding bill. The House original appropriated new budgets for the Department of Defense (DoD), military construction (MilCon) and the Veterans Affairs department.
 
The Senate added new budgets for Agriculture, Commerce, Justice, Homeland Security, NASA, and select other agencies. All others will be funded at FY 2012 levels. (For our take on the overall impacts of the House bill check out this recent blog and for some DoD, VA and DHS implications see this blog.)
 
Year-over-Year Changes
 
Of the handful of appropriations bills that were finally passed, Congress did make some changes to fund select departments and agencies to reflect current priorities and give some flexibility in dealing with spending caps. A summary of these appropriations are presented in the table below.
 
 
 
 
Department of Defense
 
Total FY 2013 discretionary spending for DoD is set at totals $604.9 billion, including $87 billion for Overseas Contingency Operations. This is roughly $30 billion less than the FY 2012 appropriations, representing a decrease of 4.5%. Other highlights and funding priorities in the bill include:
  • Complies with the Budget Control Act spending caps by eliminating unneeded, unrequested funding that would be provided if the CR was extended
  • Directs 671 cuts to unnecessary or under-performing programs and eliminates excess funding due to schedule delays, program terminations, redundancies, and budgeting errors
  • Rescinds nearly $4 billion in unspent prior year funds
  • Aligns funding to new Defense strategy to fund current needs and reprioritizes funds to address known shortfalls
  • Fully complies with Senate Rule XLIV for transparency and maintains earmark moratorium
  • Bill provides the necessary funding for training and military health care
  • Adds $1.5 billion to the National Guard and Reserve Equipment account
  • $486 million to repair aging base facilities
  • Adds $463 million to mitigate shortfalls in day-to-day operation costs for installations
  • Increases funding for nanotechnology, advanced materials, silicon carbide, and manufacturing technologies
 
Homeland Security
 
Overall FY 2013 discretionary spending for DHS is $39.6 billion, excluding $254 million for Overseas Contingency and $6.4 billion for the disaster relief cap adjustment.
  • Coast Guard: $10.4 billion overall, of which $9 billion is discretionary spending. The bill also provides targeted increases above the FY 2013 request to support front line personnel with resources, including $8 million for initial acquisition planning and design of a new polar icebreaker and $20 million to reverse cuts proposed in the request for critical operational assets.
  • Transportation Security Administration (TSA): $7.5 billion for TSA is reduced by $2.4 billion in offsetting collections and fees. The bill includes funding for investments in explosives detection systems, passenger screening technologies, and air cargo security. The bill includes several funding oversight requirements including expenditure plans for checkpoint security technology investments, explosives detection systems for checked baggage, and air cargo security. In addition, language is included requiring TSA to provide a five-year investment plan forecast for passenger screening technologies.
  • U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP): $11.9 billion, which adds $79 million above the request for procurement, operations, and maintenance of critical air and marine assets used to defend our borders – including one additional multi-role enforcement aircraft, enhanced radar for unmanned aerial systems, and $28 million to increase flight hours.
  • U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE): $5.7 billion for ICE, primarily supporting personnel and operations, including border patrol, special agents and immigration officials.
  • United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS): $112 million in direct appropriations for USCIS and fully funds the E-Verify employment eligibility verification system.
  • United States Secret Service: $1.6 billion, adding $3.5 million for priority domestic and electronic crimes investigations and continues the multi-year modernization of critical White House and other Secret Service information technology and communications systems.
  • Science and Technology (S&T): $835 million, returning to FY 2011 levels, for R&D in biological defense, explosives defense, cyber security, first responders, border security, chemical countermeasures, and interoperability.
  • Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO): $318 million, including $28 million for handheld portable radiation detectors and $75 million for research and development of next-generation detection technologies.
  • National Protection and Programs Directorate (NPPD): $1.4 billion, including the following:
    • $232 million for a new account, the Office of Biometric Identity Management (OBIM). Instead of realigning the US-VISIT program as proposed in the FY 2013 budget, the bill creates a new account for OBIM, the DHS lead responsible for biometric identity management services.
    • $756 million for cybersecurity programs including Einstein intrusion detection and a critical cyber diagnostic strategy for the 118 federal agencies. Also included in cybersecurity funding is $16.8 million for cyber education programs.
    • $260 million in infrastructure protection programs to bolster against natural and man-made disasters, including $78 million to implement the Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards Program.
  • Office of Health Affairs (OHA): $132 million, including $85 million for the Bio-Watch Program and $2 million to complete demonstration projects through the Chemical Defense Program.
 
Veterans Affairs
 
The VA receives $134 billion for FY 2013, which consists of $72.9B for mandatory programs ($9.1B above FY 2012) and $60.9 B for discretionary funding ($2.5B above FY 2012.)
  • Homeless Veterans Programs: $5.76B for health care and support services for homeless veterans.
  • Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans: $3.28b to meet the health care needs of veterans who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan, a $510M increase over FY 2012.
  • Long Term Care: $7.2M for long term care for the nation’s aging veterans as well as severely wounded combat veterans from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
  • Information Technology (IT): $3.3 billion for IT projects.
    • $1B for pay and associated costs
    • $1.8B for operations and maintenance
    • $494B for DME including $169m for the iEHR and $38.5m the development of paperless claims systems. Requires approval for iEHR spending over 25% of total allotted. 
 
Health and Human Services
  • National Institutes of Health: Provides $1.5b for NIH, a $71m increase including $165m for the National Children’s Study.
  • Food and Drug Administration: Provides $2.5b for the FDA including $50m for implementation of the Food Safety Modernization Act.
  • Child Care and Development Block Grant: Provides $2.3b for the program, which is a $50m increase for grants to states to improve working families’ access to quality, affordable child care.
  • HHS Lease Assistance: Provides additional funding to address imminent lease expirations and consolidations to allow HHS to save millions in annual lease costs and reduce its real property portfolio.
  • Head Start:  Provides a $33.5m increase for the Head Start program.
 
Transportation
  • Section 1801 of the legislation increases funding for highway, highway safety, and motor carrier safety programs to make them consistent with the levels previously authorized under the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP-21) Act. Total funding provided by MAP-21 was $561 million in FY 2013 and $572 million in FY 2014.
  • Normalized MAP-21 funding potentially has an impact on initiatives related to the improvement of travel data collection and safety management. These initiatives would include active procurements for Compliance Test Procedures for Electronic Logging Devices and the Road Inventory Program, as well as task orders under contract # DTFAAC09D00081 held by SAIC for NextGen Initiatives Support Services.
 
Commerce
  • Department of Commerce will receive $7.7B in total funding.
  • The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) will receive $5B, including funding for satellite programs.
  • The Patents and Trademark Office (PTO) provides $2.88B.
  • The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) receives $809M for laboratories and research.
  • Bureau of the Census will receive $906M.
 
Justice
  • Department of Justice will receive $27.3B in total funding.
  • Grants to State and Local Law Enforcement and crime victims total $2.2B. This includes funding for the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) improvements.
  • Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) receives$8B for salaries and expenses for national security and counterterrorism investigations, combating cyber threats.
  • Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) receives $2.36B.
 
Energy
  • Energy Department funding was reduced by a total of $44M.
  • Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy reduced by $11 M
  • Nuclear Energy reduced by $10M.
  • Science reduced by $13M.
  • Advanced Research Projects Agency –Energy reduced by $10M to $265M.
  • Atomic Energy Defense Activities, National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) $7.577B, an increase of $363M.
  • Atomic Energy Defense Activities, Defense Nuclear Proliferation receive an additional $110M.
 
Agriculture
  • USDA’s operating budget is a winner this time around as FY 2013 discretionary funding of $20.5 billion represents a 5% increase over the FY 2012 level of $19.5 billion. Funding includes:
  • $24 million for USDA Departmental Administration to provide for necessary expenses for management support services and general administration. These support services include enterprise IT services provided by the National IT Center (NITC) and investments in enterprise IT modernization called for by the USDA’s Optimized Computing Environment (OCE) initiative.
  • $44 million for the Office of the Chief Information Officer and $6 million for the Office of the Chief Financial Officer.
  • $89 million for the Office of Inspector General that the legislation states may be used for contracting.
  • $811 thousand for the Office of the Under Secretary for Food Safety and calls out that funding shall be directed to the Public Health Data Communication Infrastructure System (PHDCIS) until expended. This potentially affects the following vendors and contracts: General Dynamics, # AG3A94D090194 & Dell, # AG3A94D090137.
  • $75 million for the Risk Management Agency (RMA), including funding that may be used for the Common Information Management System (CIMS). This affects the IT Support Services contract, # GST0011AJ0019, held by SAIC.
 
NASA
  • National Aeronautics and Space Administration receives $17.5B in total funding.
  • Space Launch System receives $2.1 B including funding for ground operations and construction and related test facilities.
  • Funding for the International Space Station (ISS) includes $515M for commercial crew transportation to the ISS and $2.9B for operations and research.
  • NASA Science includes $630M for Space Technology to support human and robotic missions.
 
Education
  • Safe Schools and Citizenship: Allows funds available under the Department of Education Safe Schools and Citizenship account to be used to assist educational institutions impacted by school violence.
 
Interior
  • Bureau of Land Management $951M for Management of Lands and Resources, $0 for construction.
  • US Fish and Wildlife Service, $1.2B for Resources Management
 
Labor
  • Job Corps Program: Provides an additional $30m for the program.
  • Unemployment Insurance: Decreases funding for grants to state agencies that administer federal and state unemployment insurance (UI) by $60m.
 
Fellow GovWin Federal Industry Analysis (FIA) analysts Kyra Fussell, Angela Petty, and Alex Rossino contributed to this entry.

---
Originally published for Federal Industry Analysis: Analysts Perspectives Blog. Stay ahead of the competition by discovering more about GovWin FIAFollow on twitter @GovWinFIA.

More Entries