OMB Memo for 360 Aquistions Review

EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
W ASHINGTON, D.C. 20503

March 18, 2015
OFFICE OF FEDERAL
PROCUREMENT POLICY

MEMORANDUM FOR CHIEF ACQUISITION OFFICERS
SENIOR PROCUREMENT EXECUTIVES
FROM:

Anne E. Rung
Administrator

SUBJECT:

Acquisition 360 – Improving the Acquisition Process through Timely
Feedback from External and Internal Stakeholders

Successful acquisitions depend on a clear understanding of the market’s capabilities and
dynamics, and this requires early and meaningful engagement with industry and the application
of strong management practices within the agency. During the first open dialogue on improving
the way the Federal Government does business, 1 many participants expressed concern that the
lack of communication between government and industry during the pre-award phase creates a
significant disadvantage for both sides. Vendors invest considerable time and money in
responding to government requests for proposals (RFPs), and ambiguous requirements,
unnecessarily complex solicitations, and other process challenges can greatly increase the burden
on offerors and the cost to the government. Additionally, ineffective communication between
the program office and contracting team can adversely impact an acquisition leading to
unfavorable outcomes for taxpayers.
To ensure that agencies can continually consider and improve their performance in early
vendor engagement efforts and internal acquisition practices, they need robust, timely, and
specific feedback from key stakeholders. Building upon the Office of Federal Procurement
Policy’s (OFPP) efforts on building strong vendor relationships as outlined in the December 4th,
2014 Transforming the Marketplace memorandum 2 and earlier “Myth-Busting” efforts, 3 all
Chief Financial Officers (“CFO”) Act agencies shall take the additional steps outlined below to
improve how they receive and use industry and internal feedback to strengthen their acquisition
function from pre-award activities up to, and including, contract award and debriefings. This
effort is not intended to be used to rate individual contracting officers, program managers, or
integrated project teams (IPTs), or to compare procuring offices generally, as the complexity of
procurements varies greatly among agencies, and unexpected challenges can arise. However,
these tools are meant to help agencies identify strengths and weaknesses with industry
partnerships so they can make internal improvements on the planning and making of contract
awards.

Open Dialogue on Improving How to Do Business with the Federal Government.
Transforming the Marketplace: Simplifying Federal Procurement to Improve Performance, Drive Innovation, and
Increase Savings (December 4, 2014).
3
“Myth-Busting”: Addressing Misconceptions and Further Improving Communication During the Acquisition
Process (May 7, 2012) and "Myth-Busting": Addressing Misconceptions to Improve Communication with Industry
during the Acquisition Process (February 2, 2011).
1
2

Soliciting Actionable Feedback from External and Internal Stakeholders:
To gain experience with collecting and using this important information, at a minimum
agencies shall implement the surveys described below for the lesser of 50 or 5% of new awards
for complex information technology (IT) development, systems, or services by the end of Fiscal
Year 2015. Prioritizing new, high dollar IT awards will allow for further insight into the
acquisition process for complex procurements, and will further support the Administration’s
Smarter IT Delivery efforts to ensure that we attract the best businesses as partners and continue
to improve our IT acquisition practices. However, agencies are strongly encouraged to expand
the application of these surveys as necessary to meet their management needs.
Industry Feedback
At the conclusion of the final debrief, agencies are instructed to use the survey questions
shown in Attachment A (“Rate the Agency’ Survey”) to seek vendor feedback. Agencies may
add questions to the survey to meet their specific needs, but shall retain the core set of questions.
All vendors who submitted proposals, whether they were in the competitive range or not, shall be
asked to rate various aspects of the acquisition process, such as the strength of the requirements
development process, the clarity of the solicitation, and the efficacy of the agency in executing
awards and debriefing offerors. The post-award survey shall be voluntary and confidential for
the vendors. Similarly, the survey does not convey any protections, rights, or grounds for
protest, but creates a way for vendors to give the government constructive feedback about the
pre-award and debriefing process on a specific acquisition.4
Because this effort surveys the public, agencies should begin discussions with their
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) officers to determine what steps are needed to implement this
voluntary vendor survey. 5 Some agencies may have already received approval from the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) for a generic clearance for the collection of qualitative
feedback on agency service delivery. OFPP worked closely with the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) to ensure the attached vendor survey questions are appropriate for the
expedited generic clearance process and OIRA is aware that agencies will be submitting
questions shortly. Agencies may expand the use of this survey, as needed, to help them meet
their management goals, but are reminded to ensure that the PRA requirements have been met.
For agencies that do not currently have OMB approval for a generic clearance for the collection
of qualitative feedback on agency service delivery, agency PRA offices should be consulted to
begin the PRA clearance process. OFPP will continue to work with OIRA to use existing
flexibilities under the PRA to help agencies in future survey efforts.
Internal Customer Satisfaction Feedback
Many agencies use customer satisfaction tools to assess how well their contracting offices
are meeting the demands of their program clients. While this is an important element of the
Solicitations where competitive procedures were used, but where only one bid was received, represent an area
of particular concern in any contracting operation and can be explored using FedBizOpps subscriber information or
other tools. While the surveys within this memo do not specifically address one-bid scenarios, OMB will continue
to require agencies to focus on reducing one-bid scenarios through the President’s Management Agenda
Benchmarking Initiative. Agencies are encouraged to use their own questions in investigating one-bid scenarios
and OFPP will consider one-bid questionnaires in future survey iterations.
5
FAQs for New Fast-Track Process for Collecting Service Delivery Feedback under the Paperwork Reduction Act.
4

2

acquisition process, contracting offices also depend on effective program offices and other team
members as partners. To ensure that valuable feedback from the entire acquisition team is
captured, agencies shall use the questions in Attachment B (“Evaluation of the Contracting
Operation”) for program offices to evaluate their contracting offices, and Attachment C
(“Evaluation of the Program Office’s Participation in the Procurement”) for contracting offices
to evaluate their customers. If other offices played a significant role in the process (e.g., the
agency’s Office of General Counsel or privacy officials), program office staff are strongly
encouraged to involve these key members in formulating the survey response. Agencies may
add questions to the surveys to meet their specific needs, but shall retain the core set of questions
for each of the surveys.
In addition to getting feedback on how well the acquisition team worked, we are also
interested in better understanding why contracting officers choose certain interagency solutions
over others, or why they choose certain contract vehicles. As such, there are two additional
questions on the contracting officer’s survey for those awards made using Government-wide
Acquisition Contracts (GWACs) and General Services Administration (GSA) Schedules.
Surveying these customers will allow servicing agencies 6 to compare satisfaction rates with
different procurement services across government. This information will be helpful as we
implement category management and further leverage the buying power of the government while
reducing the number of duplicative vehicles. Simultaneous to this effort, GSA will begin
surveying agency customers and vendors regarding their eBuy experience on select acquisitions,
which will provide further information on the effectiveness of our acquisition solutions and
processes.
Ensure that you check with your agency’s PRA officers to determine if any agencyspecific steps are required to collect information, including surveys, from government personnel.
Additionally, agencies should determine any requirements based on existing labor management
relationships and collective bargaining agreements prior to surveying employees.
Implementation Timeline and Considerations
Agencies should immediately begin identifying the acquisitions for which they plan to
use these surveys, and work with their PRA officer to determine what steps, if any, need to be
taken. To help agencies jumpstart their implementation, within one month of the date of this
memorandum, agencies must identify at least the two of their largest contracts or orders for
complex IT development, systems, or services awarded within the past six months and conduct
the external survey and two internal surveys retroactively for each of these awards. 7
Agencies must then provide OFPP with an aggregate-level summary of data from these
initial retroactive surveys by July 2015 or within one month of the surveys’ issuance if nongeneric PRA clearance is needed. Later data collections of internal survey efforts will be
directed by OFPP and may supplement customer satisfaction data collected through the
President’s Management Agenda Benchmarking Initiative, informing decisions as agencies
identify areas of focus and develop plans to address key findings. 8 Moving forward, we expect
e.g., Department of the Interior (DOI), Health and Human Services (HHS), National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA), General Services Administration (GSA), and others.
7
If non-fast track PRA approval is needed, agencies must take action within one month after the date of approval.
8
Benchmarking data is available to MAX account holders at http://benchmarks.gsa.gov/.
6

3

to further align these initiatives to make the best use of this data. OFPP welcomes feedback and
will revisit thresholds and implementation issues as we receive agency input.
Agencies should strive to use common tools to gather information. The survey is
relatively simple and can be administered using free or low-cost commercially available tools or
even e-mail. A list containing various free survey tools which have “federal friendly” Terms of
Use is available at http://www.digitalgov.gov/resources/negotiated-terms-of-service-agreements/.
Agencies can easily set up a survey using one of these tools, or implement their survey using
their existing tools and methods. There is no need to develop additional systems for
implementation at this time.
This initiative is not intended to replace any general agency customer satisfaction
surveys, but to promote the use of transactional data to better target opportunities for
improvement. Agencies may add questions to the surveys to meet their specific needs, but shall
retain the core set of questions for each of the surveys. However, agencies should be aware of
survey fatigue and seek to consolidate and reduce the number of queries where possible.
Using the Feedback
The results of agencies’ external and internal surveys shall be submitted to the agencies’
Chief Acquisition Officer, Senior Procurement Executive, vendor engagement official, and other
appropriate agency leaders in order to strengthen their acquisition practices. Additionally,
agencies will be asked to submit aggregate response data, so that OMB can improve any
potential future surveys. Agencies should use their responses to identify best practices and any
subject areas in need of improvement, not to evaluate individuals or make programmatic
changes.
Feedback collected under this initiative should be used to complement agencies’ regular
post-award program management activities and performance assessments, such as those required
by Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 42.15 to evaluate contractor performance, to identify
planning and engagement practices that lead to better program results.
Through this effort we hope agencies will have better, more actionable data that will help
them improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the acquisition process so that we can partner
with the best and most innovative companies and reduce the cost of the process for all
stakeholders. As we gain experience with this feedback effort, we will reevaluate the questions,
focus areas, and survey thresholds after the initial results are received in order to continuously
improve our customer feedback efforts. In order to coordinate efforts and share information,
each of the 24 CFO Act agencies is asked to send Porter Glock, pglock@omb.eop.gov, a pointof-contact for survey implementation by April 1st.
Thank you for your attention to this important initiative to help us improve the
acquisition process.

4

Attachment A – “Rate the Agency” Survey
Pre-Award & Debriefing Satisfaction Survey
Your firm submitted an offer for Solicitation No. _____ from procurement office ___________.
Please provide us with your feedback on the acquisition process. Your answers will help us
assess our performance and identify our strengths and weaknesses. The survey should take no
more than 10 minutes to complete. The survey will be issued after any and all debriefings
have been conducted and therefore cannot impact the award decision in any way. The
results from the survey will not be published or made publicly available.
Please submit your response within the next thirty days to: [insert agency contact information
here].
Please rate your level of satisfaction on a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being “Very Satisfied” and 1
being “Very Dissatisfied”
Very
Satisfied

Requirements Development Process - How satisfied were you:
1. With the agency’s vendor engagement methods
(e.g., RFIs, draft RFP, pre-award conferences) in
5
fostering early communication and exchange
before receipt of proposals?
2. That the exchange offered by any industry day(s)
offered valuable information that improved your
5
understanding of the agency’s requirements?
3. With the agency’s understanding of your firm’s
5
marketplace?
4. With the clarity of the final requirements?
5
Solicitation Phase - How satisfied were you:
5. That the agency kept vendors informed about any
delays in the solicitation process (considering
both the initial release and any subsequent
delays)?
6. That the solicitation included clear proposal
submission instructions that sufficiently guided
offerors or respondents in preparing proposals or
responses to requests for information?
7. That the government chose an appropriate
contract type?
8. That the government chose an appropriate source
selection methodology?

Very
Dissatisfied

4

3

2

1

N/A

4

3

2

1

N/A

4

3

2

1

N/A

4

3

2

1

N/A

5

4

3

2

1

N/A

5

4

3

2

1

N/A

5

4

3

2

1

N/A

5

4

3

2

1

N/A

9. That the agency answered questions regarding the
solicitation in such a way that it helped you to
5
prepare the proposal?
10. With the opportunity to propose unique and
innovative solutions (i.e., the solicitation
5
promoted innovation)?
11. With the clarity of the solicitation’s evaluation
5
criteria?
12. With the amount of time the agency gave to
5
submit a proposal?
13. That the solicitation’s evaluation criteria allowed
for the best selection among competing
5
proposals?
Award Execution and Debriefings- How satisfied were you:
14. With the agency’s resolution of issues/concerns
5
related to the contracting process?
15. With the robustness of the agency’s debriefing
5
(i.e., it allowed you to understand how to improve
on similar efforts in the future)?
16. How satisfied were you with your overall
5
experience on this acquisition?
17. Please provide any additional comments:

18. Are you a small business?
[Insert agency PRA notice here.]

4

3

2

1

N/A

4

3

2

1

N/A

4

3

2

1

N/A

4

3

2

1

N/A

4

3

2

1

N/A

4

3

2

1

N/A

4

3

2

1

4

3

2

1

Yes

No

N/A
N/A

Attachment B – Evaluation of the Contracting Operation

As you recently worked with the _______ procurement office on solicitation #____________ in
making an award, please evaluate your experience.
Please rate your level of satisfaction on a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being “Very Satisfied” and 1
being “Very Dissatisfied”
Very
Satisfied

Planning - How satisfied were you:
1. With the acquisition milestone schedule?
2. With the procurement office’s ability to keep you
informed of any changes to the acquisition
milestone schedule?
3. With the procurement office’s assistance in the
Acquisition Plan process, which allowed you to
better understand and participate in the
procurement?
4. With the procurement office’s engagement with
industry early in the acquisition process?
Communication - How satisfied were you:
5. With the procurement office’s responsiveness to
your questions (communicating in a clear,
courteous, timely, and professional manner)?
6. With the procurement office’s effectiveness in
resolving any issues or delays encountered during
the acquisition process?
7. With your understanding on how - and to whom –
you should elevate problems for resolution?
8. With early communications describing the roles
and responsibilities of the procurement office and
of your office (program office)?
9. How satisfied were you with the overall
support provided by the procurement office in
the acquisition process?
10. Please provide any additional comments:

Very
Dissatisfied

5

4

3

2

1

N/A

5

4

3

2

1

N/A

5

4

3

2

1

N/A

5

4

3

2

1

N/A

5

4

3

2

1

N/A

5

4

3

2

1

N/A

5

4

3

2

1

N/A

5

4

3

2

1

N/A

5

4

3

2

1

N/A

11. Were you part of an IPT (Integrated Procurement
Yes
No
Team)?
Reminder: After one year, or completion of performance, work with your Contracting Officer (CO) to evaluate
the contract awardee’s performance in CPARS

Attachment C – Evaluation of the Program Office’s Participation in the Procurement
As you recently worked with ________ program office on solicitation #____________, please
evaluate your experience.
Please rate your level of satisfaction on a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being “Very Satisfied” and 1
being “Very Dissatisfied”
Very
Satisfied

Planning - How satisfied were you:
1. That the program office conducted meaningful
market research?
2. With the program office’s ability to provide any
necessary documents allowing for the timely
completion of the acquisition package?
3. That the program office allotted adequate time for
a successful procurement?
4. That the program office allotted adequate
resources to allow for a successful procurement?
Communication - How satisfied were you:
5. With the clarity and effectiveness of the program
office’s communication of their needs and time
constraints?
6. With the program office’s responsiveness to your
questions (communicating in a clear, courteous,
timely, and professional manner)?
7. With my understanding on how - and to whom –
you should elevate problems for resolution in the
program office?
8. With the program office’s technical expertise in
evaluating proposals?
9. How satisfied were you with the overall
support provided by the program office in the
acquisition process?
10. Please provide any additional comments:

Very
Dissatisfied

N/A

5

4

3

2

1

N/A

5

4

3

2

1

N/A

5

4

3

2

1

N/A

5

4

3

2

1

N/A

5

4

3

2

1

N/A

5

4

3

2

1

N/A

5

4

3

2

1

N/A

5

4

3

2

1

N/A

5

4

3

2

1

N/A

Reminder: After one year, or completion of performance, work with your Contracting Officer’s Representative
(COR) to evaluate the contract awardee’s performance in CPARS.

For awards made using Government-wide
Acquisition Contracts (GWACs) or GSA Schedules
1. Please rate your overall satisfaction with the
contract vehicle based upon the outcomes you
have experienced so far

Very
Satisfied

5

4

3

2

Very
Dissatisfied

N/A

1

N/A

2. Which of the following criteria played a role in
your selection of this contract vehicle (check all
that apply):

Saves Time
Flexibility
Ease of Use
Familiarity
Vendor Access
Ability to meet small business goals
Ability to meet sustainability goals
Complies with agency policy