GovWin
 
 
The Army Tightens its Chokehold on COTS IT Procurement

Like all of the Department of Defense, the U.S. Army has struggled in recent years to adapt to declining funding.  In response to the tightening fiscal situation, Army leadership has introduced measures that are intended to reduce spending on information technology products and services.  As these measures evolve they are reshaping the Army’s IT acquisition environment in dramatic ways.  The number of acquisition vehicles that contracting offices can use has been limited, the type of IT hardware and software Army customers can buy has been restricted, and the number of service contracts competed has been reduced.  The result is an increasingly challenging business environment that presents considerable difficulties for IT vendors.

Background

Cost reduction efforts introduced in 2011 centered on an initiative called the “Army Request for IT.”  ARFIT introduced measures intended to drive down IT costs, including:
  • Stricter administrative oversight to capture the amount of money being spent on software, hardware, and IT services
  • Reducing the amount of funds flowing through higher cost, non-enterprise contracts for IT SW, HW, services, and maintenance agreements
  • Maximizing cost-effectiveness by increasing use of the Army’s Computer Hardware, Enterprise Software and Solutions (CHESS) Program
  • Improving the security of the Army’s LandWarNet Network

Administrative responsibility for ensuring that ARFIT measures were implemented was initially assigned to four Gatekeepers – the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics and Technology (ASA-ALT); the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Financial Management and Comptroller (ASA-FM&C); Army Materiel Command (AMC); and Army Cyber Command (ARCYBER).

One year later, in June 2012, John McHugh, the Secretary of the Army, published a memorandum outlining the responsibilities of three organizations designated as gatekeepers (AMC was dropped from the list at this point).  In this memo the SECARM sharpened the stick of Army IT acquisition reform into a point.
  • The ASA-ALT was directed to enforce the spending of funds through the appropriate authorized contracting vehicles, especially the contracts provided by the Army’s CHESS program and the DoD’s Enterprise Software Initiative Blanket Purchase Agreements
  • The ASA-FM&C was made responsible for ensuring that Army commands execute IT purchasing in compliance with stated policy (i.e., Commands use CHESS and ESI to the greatest extent possible)
  • ARCYBER was made responsible for ensuring that IT products and services properly align with the Army’s efforts to secure and defend its networks
Finally, so far in FY 2013 two critical developments have appeared in relation to ARFIT.  First, in February 2013, the Army CIO/G6 released detailed guidance concerning IT Management Reform.  ITMR calls for ARFIT to be fully implemented no later than the end of FY 2013.  Second, in June, the SECARM issued a memo removing the authority of Product Director CHESS to issue waivers for Army customers seeking to purchase commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) IT.  Starting on 1 July 2013, most Army customers (except the U.S Military Academy and those responsible for non-Program Executive Officer/Project Manager managed Military Intelligence Program (MIP) systems) will be required to submit COTS IT waiver requests to Army Headquarters directly for approval.

Implications and Opportunities

The implication of AFRIT for vendors, especially those who sell COTS IT, is stark – either your company wins a spot on CHESS commodity IT contracts or you can forget doing business with most Army customers.  This is of course unless your company sells its products through resellers who hold a CHESS contract.  Services vendors retain a wider variety of possibilities because of the Army’s size and ongoing struggle getting a handle on services procurement.  This said, even Army IT services spending over the next few years is expected to decline.

One possibility in this environment is to compete for the next iteration of the Common Hardware Systems 5 (CHS 5) contract.  The current CHS 4 contract held by General Dynamics is due to expire in August 2016, meaning vendors should see procurement activity begin in FY 2014.  Then there is the upcoming competition for the follow-on to CHESS’ IT Enterprise Solutions 2 Services (ITES 2S) contract vehicle.  ITES 2S is one of the Army’s most used IT services contracts so winning a spot on ITES 3S would be a key victory.  GovWin expects the competition for ITES 3S to begin in Q2 FY 2014.

 

Digital Strategy Scorecard Highlights Progress, Despite Open Items

May 23, 2013 marked the one year anniversary of the Digital Government Strategy.  As government organizations worked toward their remaining deliverables, others took stock of the progress they’ve made toward the goal of delivering better services to American citizens.
 
Steven VanRoekel, Federal Chief Information Officer, has described the achievements in four categories: increasing data-centric approach to information technology, promoting shared platforms and services, improving customer access to information and services, and maintaining cybersecurity. These categories covered ten different milestones, which were comprised of a combined twenty-nine actions. The milestones scorecard shows that close to 76% of the milestones were achieved. While 4% of the actions appear to have not been completed, the statuses of several efforts are difficult to assess due to variance across agency reporting.
 
 
Originally published for Federal Idustry Analysis: Analysts Perspectives Blog. Stay ahead of them competition by discovering more about GovWinIQ. Follow me on twitter @FIAGovWin.

Health care to take a large chunk of Ohio's budget for FY 2014-2015

According to Ohio Governor John Kaisch, “economic competitiveness” will be the focus for Ohio’s upcoming fiscal years, in which the state will be placing heavy emphasis on job creation. Governor Kaisch outlined several goals expected to drive this transformation within the state which includes:

  • Improving Education for All Children: Creating a “world-class” education system that increases achievement and provides high-quality opportunities for all students.
  • Helping More Students Get Degrees:  Increasing the current percentage (25%) of Ohioans with a bachelor’s degree, so they are able to get on an expedited course to long-term success and stability.
  • Cutting and Reforming Taxes: Cutting small business taxes in half for the first $750,000 in net income, income taxes by 20 percent and state sales tax rate from 5.5 percent to 5.0 percent to help low-income Ohioans who pay no income taxes.
  • Making Medicaid Work Better: Helping more low-income and working Ohioans have access to health care through Medicaid. This is expected to improve the health of vulnerable Ohioans, and helps free up local funds for enhanced mental health and addiction services.
  • Meeting Ohio’s Crucial Transportation Needs: Investing O$3 billion into the Ohio Turnpike in order to strengthen the transportation network. Additional highway dollars raised by the sale of the new Turnpike bonds will help accelerate other highway projects in Northern Ohio.
  • Creating a Smarter, More Efficient State Government: Making sure state agencies are providing sustainable value to Ohioans, a high level of care for the state’s most vulnerable citizens and a jobs-friendly environment for future prosperity.

Health care seems to be taking the lead as far as budget share goes for both FY 2014 and 2015 (See Figure 1). The appropriation for the upcoming fiscal years has increased tremendously, due to a national shift in focus on health-related technologies. If approved, the Ohio Department of Health could receive nearly $650 million in both FY 2014 and 2015. This does not include all the other major health-related agencies within the state such as the Department of Mental Health, the Department of Aging, and the Department of Medicaid. When these entities are included, health care in Ohio could be receiving approximately $26 billion in FY 2014 and $28 billion in FY 2015. As mentioned earlier, one of Ohio’s goals for the upcoming years is improving Medicaid. Funding will be used to tackle issues such as fraud, waste and abuse in order to enhance Medicaid’s efficiency. Payment processes are also expected to be improved, where Ohio will reward hospitals based on quality as oppose to volume. Medicaid is the largest program in the state budget and has a recommended General Revenue Fund (GRF) of $15.1 billion for FY 2014; $16.8 billion FY 2015.

 

Figure 1

Part of the plan in Ohio for Medicaid and Health care ï»¿will be to streamline health and human services (HHS) program. This includes modernizing eligibility determination systems and improving state agency operations. The Ohio Department of Administrative Services is in the process of securing services for ongoing Organization Change Management Services to support the rollout and production operations of the Integrated Eligibility and HHS Business Intelligence (BI) System. The development and implementation of the integrated Eligibility and HHS BI System is a multi-phase, multi-year project. Accenture was awarded the contract to build the new system back in February 2013. The contract is worth over $300 million, and will expire in October 2018. 

For more information on Ohio’s FY 2014-2015 budget, download an extended version of this article here.

Not a Deltek subscriber? Click here to learn more about Deltek’s GovWin IQ database and take advantage of a free trial.

 

Open Government Data Ramps Up

This month’s executive order and administrative policy on open data come four years after the launch of data.gov and an order tasking agencies to provide at least three “high-value datasets.” The hype is already building around the impact of the next phase of open government data.
 
Following the executive order issued on May 9, 2013, Making Open and Machine Readable the New Default for Government Information, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issued an Open Data Policy establishing guidance for agencies to release data in “open, machine-readable formats.” (Even the policy itself is open.)
 
Over the next three months, agencies are expected to incorporate this new policy into performance goals. A six month timeline is set for agencies to update policies and create public listing of available datasets. Within 30 days of the policy release, federal chief information officer Steven VanRoekel and federal chief technology officer Todd Park were tasked with publishing “an open online repository of tools and best practices.” Not long after the policy announcement, OMB and the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) launched Project Open Data, including implementation guidance, tools, resources, and case studies. Within 90 days, OMB will integrated the policy into governance for purchasing of agency IT systems and services.
 
The Sunlight Foundation’s John Wonderlich responded with enthusiasm to the release of more government data, but he noted that delivery of this data is supposed to be done without any additional spending. Agencies are also supposed to take the “mosaic effect,” piecemeal information combined to pose a risk, into consideration with the information they make public. So, before disclosing information, other publicly available data (in any medium, from any source) could be combined to identify an individual or pose another security concern. This raises question about what datasets agencies will release. As Wonderlich noted, “Concerns like cost, privacy, and security will be used to justify non-disclosure (as they often are), and will be used to try to justify keeping even a description of many datasets private.” This suggestion reiterates that the barriers to delivering high value datasets are not technical ones.
 
Last May, with the Digital Government: Building a 21st Century Platform to Serve the American People, agencies were directed to create public application programming interfaces (API) the could be leveraged by government and private developers. And, on Thursday, May 23, 2013, government officials will release the final set of almost 300 APIs that will enable users to stream information from agencies to computers, websites and mobile applications. Officials will continue adding API’s to the list after the launch. It’s hoped that this API catalog will enable private companies and non-profits to leveraging government data, as with Global Positioning System data. In remarks delivered in Austin, Texas on May 10, 2013, President Obama explained that greater access to government information will “fuel more private sector innovation and discovery,” yield entrepreneurial opportunities, enable startups, and promote economic growth. It also has the potential to improve the solutions available to government organizations.
 
The increasing liberal use of the phrase “treasure trove of data” in referring to the measure of information within the government calls to mind another expression about the relative nature of “treasure.”  While developers will put data to work, the value it returns will rely on the viewpoint. For the most part, open government data has been outward facing, related to products and activities of agency mission areas. Inward looking information, related to management and decision making, comes sparingly by comparison. 
 
Government contractors expand and improve current products and services stand to benefit from the move toward open data. Since, open and machine readable data will be part of governance for federal IT purchases going forward, products and services that currently meet those requirements will be well positioned.
 

Originally published for Federal Idustry Analysis: Analysts Perspectives Blog. Stay ahead of them competition by discovering more about GovWinIQ. Follow me on twitter @FIAGovWin.

Reintroduced DATA Act Aims to Curb Federal Waste and Fraud

Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) formally introduced the Digital Accountability and Transparency Act, known as the DATA Act, on May 21st to the House and the Senate.

The Data Act, would require agencies to use standard formats to share internal and external federal spending information and make it available on a searchable web platform.  The legislation calls for Treasury to establish the data standards in consultation with OMB, GSA, and the heads of federal agencies, and to make the data publicly accessible in a bulk, machine-readable format via an improved USASpending.gov site.

The DATA Act originally made its debut in 2012 where it passed the House in April of last year, but died in the Senate after only one hearing.  Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA) introduced similar legislation in the Senate in September. 

The Obama administration is also promoting open data by way of an executive order issued to agencies on May 9th.  However, the purpose and focus of the executive order is to promote continued job growth, government efficiency, and the social good by making federal data more open and widely accessible, whereas the DATA Act is aimed specifically at federal spending transparency and accountability.

The last time around, the Obama administration did not support the DATA Act, complaining that it would create a new set of regulations and rules, and would add more complexity and burden on agencies.  Changes have been made to the legislation since the original 2012 draft, but it is unclear whether or not it will garner support from the White House.  

The bill is backed by the Data Transparency Coalition headed by Hudson Hollister, former counsel to Issa’s committee, and has support of Eric Cantor (R-VA), House majority leader.  The legislation is also backed by government watchdog, the Sunlight Foundation who promotes greater government openness and transparency, and provides new tools and resources for media and citizens.  

Whether the act passes or not, the administration will continue to pursue transparency as a way to stimulate innovation, increase efficiency and reduce waste.  Contractors, grant recipients, and agencies should expect financial reporting requirements to persist and even increase in order to add transparency across government spending and decrease waste, fraud, and abuse.  

 

 

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.

 

OMB Report Charts Growth in Discretionary Spending

The Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) submitted its reports on discretionary spending cuts to the President and Congress just ahead of the release of the President’s Budget Request. Along with a the review of spending caps, OMB also released a preview of sequestration in the spending plans for fiscal year (FY) 2014, which looks at discretionary spending out to 2023.
 
The Final 2013 Sequestration Report provides estimates of discretionary spending limits for each category in the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (BBEDCA), OMB’s scoring of the enacted 2013 discretionary appropriations bill, and comparisons with estimates from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) in its Final Sequestration Report for Fiscal Year 2013. Examining appropriations legislations enacted through April 4, 2013, OMB found that the enacted appropriations are within the discretionary spending limits for 2013 and a sequestration of discretionary budget authority is not required. (Note: The assessment by OMB is distinct from the Joint Committee sequestration.) The chart below shows the caps after various re-categorization adjustments.

BBEDCA provides caps for discretionary program spending each year through 2021. Originally, discretionary programs were separated into “security” and “non-security” categories, which are shown above in the funding levels for fiscal years 2012 and 2013.
·          The security category included budget accounts for the Departments of Defense, Homeland Security, Veterans Affairs, the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), the Intelligence Community Management Account, and all accounts in the international affairs budget function.
·          The nonsecurity category covered everything else. After 2013, BBEDCA provided a single category for all discretionary spending.
 
The Budget Control Act (BCA) allowed for revision of the spending caps if the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction proposed legislation to reduce the deficit by $1.2 trillion was not enacted by January 15, 2012. Since legislation was neither proposed nor enacted, the caps were revised in OMB’s Final Sequestration Report of Fiscal Year 2012, which was issued January 18, 2012.
·          The revised security (“defense”) category included only funding for discretionary programs in the national defense budget function: Department of Defense, portions of Department of Energy (including NNSA), and the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
·          The revised nonsecurity (“non-defense”) category covered all other discretionary programs.
·          The discretionary category for 2014 to 2021 was replaced by caps for the defense and non-defense categories. While the budget caps were adjusted to reflect the redefined categories, the overall discretionary spending limits were not changed.
 
The spending caps were changed again, under the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 (ATRA), which reinstated the security and non-security categories for 2013 and reduced the limits by $4 billion, split evenly across the two categories. The limits for defense and non-defense spending were left in place for 2014 to 2021. However, the 2014 levels were lowered by $8 billion, split evenly across the defense and non-defense categories.

The preview report sheds light on several proposed revisions to the spending caps in the President’s Budget. The 2014  Budget includes savings in the mandatory and revenue categories, reducing the discretionary limits, restoring the 2013 sequestration amount, cancelling the 2014 mandatory sequestration order, and increasing the 2014 discretionary levels to those agreed to by Congress in ATRA. The Budget Request also proposes extending the spending caps through 2023. The reductions continue to be split between defense and nondefense categories and are set to take effect in 2017.
 
While discretionary spending at the budget proposal levels shows less growth, the levels are higher overall. According to the FY2014 Budget Proposal figures in OMB’s Sequestration Preview Report for FY 2014, the discretionary funding levels from 2013 to 2012 average $25.9 billion above those in the Final Sequestration Report for FY 2013.

The gap between the two plans for FY 2014 leaps out as a notable difference in the two series. The $97 billion increase from the Final 2013 Sequestration report is comprised of several changes. In the budget proposal, both the discretionary categories see an increase from restoring limits from ATRA. The revised security category receives an additional $54 billion, and the revised nonsecurity category receives $37 billion. While the proposed budget shows less of a drop than the Final Sequestration figures, spending rebounds a year later. If the proposed budget is accepted (though, there's ample reason to doubt that it will be), spending would approach 2013 spending levels in 2019.
 
Originally published for Federal Industry Analysis: Analysts Perspectives Blog. Stay ahead of the competition by discovering more about GovWin IQ. Follow me on twitter @FIAGovWin.

NIST to Hold Workshop Series on Cybersecurity Framework

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.)

 
Mid March, we looked at the role of private industry in implementing the cyber executive order. For government, the goal of partnership with industry is to strengthen national security both within government and across private industry. To that end, the public sector has been reaching out for input from industry, academia and the public. As Rebecca Blank, Deputy Secretary for the Department of Commerce, phrased it in her opening comments: “Government cannot and should not do this alone.”
 
It’s clear that improved information sharing, situational awareness, and public-private partnership have roles to play in moving forward. For the most part, government and industry agree that there’s a need to build on existing capabilities, to identify solutions that provide flexibility and that can adapt across varying sector requirements.
 
For many companies, cybersecurity has become an integral part of discussion around risk-management practices. Opinions vary about how to define “best practice,” and rightly so. Organizations do not have a consistent answer for how to measure the success of security practices. For the most part, risk levels are evaluated at the tactical level, rather than compared to strategic benchmarks. Raising risk and security management to a strategic level would clarify its role in business strategy. During an industry leadership panel discussion. Patrick Gallagher, the Undersecretary of Commerce for Standards and Technology and Director of NIST, described this challenge as the need “to learn about the balance between good cybersecurity and good business.”
 
In all likelihood, the best practices captured in the framework will illustrate range of approaches to security implementation. This brings us to another sticky wicket: incentives. While there’s no certainty around the success another organization might have following another company’s lead, effective policies and procedures around risk management can contribute to a competitive position. There is no current barrier to sharing practices. So what is going to change? What will motivate the private sector to adopt new security standards voluntarily? What role can the government play to facilitate the exchange?
 
For starters, they’re asking for input. The Departments of Homeland Security, Commerce and Treasury are working together to report on industry incentives. The Commerce Department posted a Notice of Inquiry on incentives for getting industry involved in the framework development process. Public comments are open until April 29, 2013.
 
Beyond that, several multiday workshops are being scheduled. The next session will be hosted at Carnegie Mellon, held from May 19th through 31st. Other sessions will be held in July and September, further informing the framework. The first draft of the framework is due in October 2013, allowing 8 months from the release of the executive order for draft to be crafted.

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.

Achieving comprehensive case management with SACWIS

This month, Deltek’s Health Care and Social Services team is taking a closer look at Statewide Automated Child Welfare Information Systems (SACWIS). A SACWIS provides an official case record on all children and families served by the Title IV-B/IV-E State agency. According to the National Resource Center for Child Welfare Data & Technology, “By law, a SACWIS is required to support the reporting of data to the Adoption and Foster Care Analysis Reporting System (AFCARS), the National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System (NCANDS) and the National Youth in Transition Database (NYTD). Furthermore, “A SACWIS/TACWIS is expected to have a bi-directional interface with a state's or tribe's title IV-A (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, or TANF), title XIX (Medicaid), and title IV-D (Child Support) systems. SACWIS/TACWIS also must collect and manage the information necessary to facilitate the delivery of child welfare support services, including family support and family preservation.” 

According to our data, 24 states have active procurement plans related to SACWIS, while 36 states and the District of Columbia have an operational SACWIS. One state moving toward implementation of a federally compliant SACWIS is Mississippi. Last month, the state’s Department of Human Services (MDHS) released an RFP for independent verification and validation (IV&V) services. The selected IV&V vendor will assist the state in the procurement of a design, development and implementation (DDI) vendor and will oversee the DDI vendor’s replacement of the legacy system, in place since 2001.

Deltek’s GovWinIQ database contents a wealth of information about other SACWIS replacement and modernization projects across the nation. Not a Deltek subscriber? Learn more and sign up for a free trial here!

Stay tuned throughout the month for additional blogs featuring SACWIS projects taking place around the nation!

 

More Entries