Click here to close this window
Close Window

About the Better Buy Project/Frequently Asked Questions

Why the Federal Acquisition Process?

On his first day in office, President Obama challenged leaders in government to "use innovative tools, methods, and systems to cooperate among themselves, across all levels of Government, and with nonprofit organizations, businesses, and individuals in the private sector." The acquisition process represents one of the most important areas of collaboration between government and the private sector.

Unfortunately, it is also among the most complex and least transparent. The Better Buy Project is an experiment dedicated to the belief that there's a lot of room for improvement in the way government buys products and services. We're testing this hypothesis by asking for your ideas on how to make acquisition process more open, transparent and collaborative.

The best part of this project is that the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) GSA would really like to adopt some of your best ideas. Promising ideas will be selected by GSA to be piloted on an upcoming acquisition, where lessons learned will be captured for future implementation. But that really depends on us, and the ideas we're able to produce.

BACK TO TOP

What Topics Are At Issue?

This project is concerned primarily with the pre-contract-award stages of the acquisition process—the activities that take place before the government "signs on the dotted line" to buy a product or service. Those areas are:

The ultimate goal is to improve how government learns about and chooses what it buys—in other words, to make government a more informed, more effective consumer.

BACK TO TOP

What Kind of Feedback Are You Looking For?

We are looking for ideas to make federal acquisition more open, transparent, and collaborative. What does that mean?

We believe that making the process more open, transparent and collaborative will make government more likely to end up with the right item at the right price.

BACK TO TOP

What Is Your Moderation Policy?

This online forum allows you the opportunity to post comments and other information that will remain publicly viewable on this website. The site therefore operates a moderation policy to ensure that comments are appropriate and not harmful to others. Comments which include any of the following may be deleted by site administrators:

Additionally, while we invite open participation and diverse viewpoints to be shared, moderators reserve the right to remove posts which do not address some aspect of the stated purpose of this forum: To collect ideas about using collaboration and social media to improve the acquisition process. We deeply value your time and input, and our desire is to remove as few posts as possible while ensuring that a focused, constructive discussion takes place.

Finally, in addition to this policy, this site allows individual users to flag ideas as being spam, duplicate, or otherwise inappropriate. When an idea is flagged a sufficient number of times, it is automatically placed into a queue for review by moderators. We reserve the right to remove any posting that receives a sufficient number of "flags" to be placed in this queue, though will not automatically do so.

BACK TO TOP

What Are The Terms Of Service And Privacy Policy?

This site is hosted using a service called UserVoice. You can read the UserVoice Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.

BACK TO TOP

Close Window
Better Buy is a joint project of the National Academy of Public Administration and the American Council for Technology-Industry Advisory Council in conjunction with the General Services Administration
IMPORTANT UPDATE FROM THE BETTERBUY PROJECT TEAM!
GSA FEDSIM has begun to act on the ideas you submitted by launching two acquisitions with the new BetterBuy Pilot Wiki. The new wiki, which was originally proposed in an idea on this site, will gather and utilize input from citizens outside the traditional acquisition community to improve the acquisition process. Be sure to check back with the BetterBuy Project regularly and continue to submit ideas.
-- The BetterBuy Project Team
How can we use collaboration and social media to make the federal acquisition process more efficient and effective?

The acquisition process – the way government buys goods and services – is among the most complex and least transparent aspects of government. The Better Buy Project is asking for your best ideas on how to make it more open and collaborative! Promising ideas will be selected by GSA to be piloted on future acquisitions. We are looking primarily at the pre-contract-award stages of the process – the activities that take place before the government "signs on the dotted line" to buy a product or service:


I suggest we ...

stop the love affair with FFP. They are training wheels for PMs that can't manage

We are being forced into FFP contracts on IT projects, and they increase the costs to the gov't (contrary to popular opinion). Contactors increase their costs at the outset due to the "risk" they're assuming, and yet there is no flexibility to adapt to changing requirements/new technology without modifying the contract. A project manager/COTR that is actively involved/managing gets a better product via a T&M contract.

28 votes
Vote
Sign in
Check!
(thinking…)
Reset
or sign in with
  • facebook
  • google
    Password icon
    I agree to the terms of service
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    anonymousanonymous shared this idea  ·   ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    5 comments

    Sign in
    Check!
    (thinking…)
    Reset
    or sign in with
    • facebook
    • google
      Password icon
      I agree to the terms of service
      Signed in as (Sign out)
      Submitting...
      • Doug FinnefrockDoug Finnefrock commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        We have a verifiable cost increase of approximately just over $10M per year to over $13M going from T&M IT application development services to FFP. FFP in IT software development environments is nothing more than Contractors covering their increased risk with higher costs, it also forces the Gov't to write rock-solid PWSs and SOWs, which can also be $ as well as problematic, particularly for applications/systems in O&M.

      • John WoodallJohn Woodall commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        FFP may not be the best choice for implementations. What if something goes wrong and it will take more time/resources than the contractor expects? The offeror would have to build a cushion int ot he pricing to cover unexpected roadblocks and that would raise the price. Implementation and R&D would be better under CPFF/CPAF or T&M. If it is a project that has a track record of several years and the Level Of Effort (LOE) can be reasonably estimated, then FFP may be a good choice. FFP does inherently shift risk to the contractor, and the contractor will expect a larger return in exchange for larger risk. Govt CO's and PM's love FFP becuase it is easy to manage and close out.

        @Jerod- FFP is not best for all situations. The contract type should fit the procurement.

      • Sterling WhiteheadSterling Whitehead commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Can anyone offer VERIFIABLE examples of how the FFP contracts increase IT project costs as opposed to other contract types?

      • Jerod ArgentJerod Argent commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Firm fixed price puts more risk on the contractor and less on the Government. That is in the best interest of all the taxpayers out here who are tired of seeing costs skyrocket under cost contracts. I hope that the regulations will not change in this area. Fixed price is the preferred method for contracting and should remain so.

      • Jeff SmithJeff Smith commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        California is making headway in ditching FFP on large IT implementations. A recent report by their independent budget analysts (LAO) urged a multi-stage process, where contractors would essentially be responsible for proof-of-concept demos before wider implementations could move forward.

      Feedback and Knowledge Base

      © 2009 UserVoice | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy