Today in the U.S. Senate, a committee will hear testimony about how major federal departments/agencies assess the costs and benefits of using contractors. Evidently there is no uniform assessment and accountability tool, which as you might suspect, leads to questionable decisions. My view is that contracting out for services isn’t inherently “good” policy or “bad” policy. It must make sense financially and in terms of skill sets and experience needed, and, in the case of sensitive information, security clearances. A well thought out assessment tool is the foundation of that. Hopefully, today’s Senate hearing will shed light on best practices, as well as deficiencies, so we can ensure that contractors are efficiently and effectively used to handle federal work. From the Federal Times:
The Defense Department, for example, was unable to report how many contractors were replaced in 2010 when the department created nearly 17,000 new government civilian positions to perform previously contracted services, committee members noted in their letter to agencies.
Workforce management officials from the Army, Department of Homeland Security and Office of Personnel Management are scheduled to testify at the committee hearing Thursday morning.
Agencies have failed to track the use of service contractors as required by law and lack a common, effective method for calculating and comparing costs between contractors and federal employees, government watchdog and industry groups said in testimony submitted to the committee.
