Procurement Countdown Summer 2001, No. 122

Highlights...

(continued on page 14)

Careers are the focus on Page2, with stories about rotations,the Intern program, and aretirement at ARC.

There are a lot of People on theMove updates on page 3 (andpages 16 and 17). Catch upwith what’s going on aroundthe Agency.

Learn about a ground breakingISO procurement at Glenn onpage 4.

See how one center is imple-menting some great IDEAS, onpage 5.

Procuring items through GSAhas real advantages, page 6.

A New Point of ViewBy Donna Fortunat, Analysis Division

It’s not what you learned inschool and it’s not what youruncle taught you. At least it’snot if your uncle’s name is“Sam.” That probably bestsums up my year plus experi-ence at Aerospace IndustriesAssociation (AIA) as their firstgovernment “Fellow.” Shortlybefore this opportunity, I’dspent a good deal of timetalking to aerospace industryexecutives while I was workingon revising NASA’s profit andfee policy and developing theAward Term pilot for theAgency. What I’d gotten fromthem was good, honest feed-back and a different but veryvalid point of view on contractincentives and profit. I’dgotten some worthwhile ideasand found the interaction to berefreshing.

The timing was perfect.When AIA approached NASA,the new profit policy andstructured fee approach waspublished, the award term pilotwas up and running, and I’djust had this positive experi-ence working with industry. It

seemed like the perfect opportu-nity to continue to explore theterritory on the other side of thefence. So, off I went to workwith a “trade” association —a.k.a., the dreaded lobbyists —fat cats of industry, smokers ofcigars, carriers of briefcasesbulging with money to line thepockets of our elected represen-

tatives. NOT!!! I know thatthere are those type of lobbyistsin Washington, but that wasn’tmy experience.

AIA is a not-for-profit tradeassociation that represents USaerospace industry manufactur-ers – big emphasis on “aero,”but that’s changing slowly.When I arrived there, I had noidea about what I’d be doing.One of AIA’s important func-tions, one that’s very useful tothe government, is to serve asthe voice of the US aerospaceindustry. In that role, they workto develop consensus positionsacross the industry on every-

thing from export control policyto improving the governmentprompt payment provisions foraerospace industry products andservices. Well, no offense tomy chosen profession, but whenthe opportunity came up to workin an area that WASN’T dealingwith prompt payment provisionsor other procurement issues, Iwent for it.

One Big Step

I spent a year as LaunchPolicy Manager for AIA’sSpace Policy Division. A majorpart of my duties was to developa national plan for US launchrange infrastructure based on aconsensus of AIA industrymembers. Since AIA’s mem-bers range from establishedlaunch providers (like Boeingand Lockmart) who use thenational ranges, to entrepreneur-ial companies in the develop-ment phase (like Kistler) whoselaunch vehicles don’t need tolaunch from Canaveral orDryden, developing a consensuswasn’t easy. It makes getting aconsensus among NASA’s

Find out about the ProcurementOfficer at Stennis on Page 8.

Jackie Norman, from KSC, ishighlighted on page 9.

JPL or NASA? Find out on page10.

If you thought IFMP was gone,think again! Page 12.

Summer 2001 page 2

ProcurementManager RetiresFrom ARCBy Carolyn S. La Follette,Ames Research Center

Earl B. LeMar, Chief,Acquisition Branch for Infor-mation Systems, at AmesResearch Center, retiredeffective June 30, 2001, after32 years of governmentservice. Following a stint inthe Navy and graduation fromSacramento State University,he immediately got an internjob with the US Army at FortOrd, CA, doing “post,camp, and stationprocurement.” Afterworking for theNavy and Air Force,he then joined NASAAmes. He went to theUS Geological Survey fortwo years to manage a smallbranch then returned to Amesto become a branch chief. Hisentire government career hasbeen in procurement, servingmore than 17 years as a super-visor. The recipient of severalawards over the years, the mostrecent one conferred was aNASA Honor Award Outstand-ing Leadership Medal. Thecitation reads: “In recognitionof your outstanding acquisitionleadership in support of theAmes Research Center’sInformation Technologymission, and your ongoingcommitment to the develop-ment of acquisition profession-als.” He will be truly missedby all of us here in the Acquisi-tion Division. His immediateplans are to stay in the BayArea, work on his “honey-do”lists (his and hers), go fishing,and to resume light aircraftflying, with some lessons first.

Recruitment for the NASA Contracting Intern Program (NCIP)Class of 2001 was very successful. Twelve co-op students haveaccepted our offers of employment. Schools represented are theUniversity of Wisconsin, New Mexico State, Arizona State, Michi-gan State, Drexel and Hampton University. Fifty-eight percent of theclass are minority and 33 percent are female. All eight centersparticipating in the NCIP willreceive at least one new co-opstudent.

We have made majorimprovements in our reten-tion of co-ops compared tothe first year. Sixty-sevenpercent of the Class of 2000are still with us, including three who have graduated from collegeand converted to interns. Three more will do so by the end of theyear.

Orientation for the Class of 2001 was held at Kennedy SpaceCenter on June 25 – 29, 2001. Speakers from the NASA HistoryOffice, each NASA enterprise, and the Procurement Office briefedthe students. Other highlights of the week were the address by anastronaut and the tour of Kennedy Space Center. After spending twoweeks back at their respective centers, the new co-ops traveled toRockville, MD, for the Basics of Contracting held July 17 – August10. The Class of 2000 gathered in Rockville, MD, for the ContractPricing class on July 10 –27.

All students completed their classes successfully and returned totheir centers to use their newly acquired knowledge. Some of theClass of 2000 will be returning to college in September. May 2002will bring a bumper crop of new interns as seven NCIP participantscomplete their undergraduate degrees and move to their rotationalassignment.

Rotational pportunities In

ther Agencies

There are several opportunities now available in the government-wide Acquisition Rotational Program. You are encouraged to checkout these opportunities at the Procurement Executives Council web-site. Currently, both Treasury and NASA have opportunities posted atwww.pec.gov/index.cfm?Fuseaction=Enhanced&Section_1=8&Section_2=15.

If your procurement office would like to post an opportunity of itsown, please contact Reginald Walker at 358-0443 for information.

Summer 2001 page 3

People onthe Move

The list ofPeople onthe Move onlyincludes thosenames thatweresubmitted tothe Procure-mentCountdown. Ifyou knowpeople whoshould belisted in thiscolumn,contact yourCenterProcurementCountdownpoint ofcontact, orsend thenames to theeditor, SusieMarucci, on(202) 358-1896, ore-mail atsusie.marucci@hq.nasa.gov.

(continued on page 16)

GSFC: NEW HIRES –Welcome Kathy Tennant toAETD/STAAC ProcurementOffice; Brenda Brady to EXP/OFA Project ProcurementOffice; Sang Lee from Langleyto ESO/ESSP/RSDO ProjectsProcurement Office;FAREWELL – MarleneForster, Associate Chief,Procurement OperationsDivision, recently retired after39 years of governmentservice; Liz Aldridge leftGoddard and moved to south-ern California with her hus-band and children. Liz’sNASA career began at theJohnson Space Center. Shelater transferred to NASAHeadquarters and then came toGoddard, where she hasworked the last 10 yearssupporting OLS, Earth Sci-ences, and HST. We hated tosee her go and really miss her.CONGRATULATIONS – BillBradley received his 30 yearpin and certificate; TrinaHaffelfinger received her 15year pin and certificate (bothare Contract Specialists forSmall Purchase Acquisition).

HQ: Tom Sauret, of theProcurement OperationsDivision, has left HQ for ayear long study at Harvard.

JSC: NEW HIRES –Jannette Reed to ProcurementPolicy and Systems Office;Rosalie Solis, Stacey Pooleand Diana Gomez to SpaceStation Procurement Office;Cindy McLean, Julie Karr andAngela Swafford to SpaceShuttle Procurement Office;

David McKay and AshlieWimberley to Space OperationsProcurement Office; Jon Woodto Projects Procurement Office;and Michele Diefenderfer toInstitutional Procurement Office

MSFC: NEW HIRES –Since June of 2000, MSFCProcurement Office has wel-comed several new personnelfrom both Industry and othergovernment agencies. PennyBattles joined MSFC from TVABrowns Ferry Nuclear Plant,Athens, AL. Penny has an MBAfrom the University of NorthAlabama and is currentlysupporting the AdvancedConcepts & Engineering Teamwithin the Space TransportationSupport Department. ThelmaCollins joined MSFC from theArmy Aviation & MissileCommand in Huntsville.Thelma attended WebsterUniversity in St. Louis, MO, andis currently enrolled at ColumbiaCollege. She is currentlysupporting the Shuttle ProjectsTeam within the Space FlightProjects Support Department.Sherry Davidson joined MSFCfrom Chugach ManagementServices, Inc. Sherry has anMSCM from Florida Institute ofTechnology and a BSBA fromAuburn University. She iscurrently supporting the ScienceTeam within the Science andCenter Operations SupportDepartment. Melinda Dodsonjoined MSFC from the ArmyAviation & Missile Command inHuntsville. Melinda has an MSin Management and a BS inBusiness Administration fromthe University of Alabama inHuntsville. She is currentlysupporting the Flight ProjectsTeam within the Space FlightProjects Support Department.

Dan Fuller joined MSFC fromthe Army Aviation & MissileCommand in Huntsville. Danhas a BA in Liberal Arts from St.John’s College and a BA inBusiness Administration fromColumbia College. Dan iscurrently supporting the CenterOperations Team within theScience and Center OperationsSupport Department. SamGonzales, Jr. joined MSFC fromthe Army Aviation & MissileCommand in Huntsville. Samhas a BS in Business Manage-ment from the Southwest TexasState University, and an MS inHuman Resources managementfrom Troy State University inMontgomery. Sam is currentlysupporting the MicrogravityTeam within the Science andCenter Operations SupportDepartment. Carol Greenwoodjoined MSFC from the BoeingCompany in Huntsville. Carolhas a BS in Business Administra-tion from the University ofAlabama in Huntsville and anMS in Contracts and Manage-ment Acquisition from FloridaInstitute of Technology. She iscurrently supporting the Institu-tional Services Team within theEngineering Support Depart-ment. Wayne Harmon joinedMSFC from DCMA in Hunts-ville. Wayne has a BS fromGeorge Mason University inFairfax and an MS from WebsterUniversity in St. Louis, MO, inBusiness Administration. Wayneis currently supporting the Policy& Review Team within thePolicy & Information Manage-ment Department. Harold Jonesjoined MSFC from the ArmyAviation & Missile Command inHuntsville. Harold has a BS in

Summer 2001 page 4

Keeping It SimpleBy Teresa Monaco, Glenn Research Center

Procurement is such arapidly changing field. Inprocessing the new contract forISO audit services, we decided touse the regulations and somecreative thinking to put a newtwist on an old way of doingthings.

In 1998 GRC issued the firstgeneration ISO contract for theAgency. From an acquisitionstandpoint, the contract actionwas a great success. We incor-porated all the current initiativesincluding CCI, Midrange,Performance Based Contracting,and Commercial Item acquisi-tion. However, when the timecame to process a follow-oncontract, we wondered whatcould be done better. Ourthought was there must be aneven more efficient way toprocess the follow-on. Wedecided to try the SimplifiedAcquisition Procedures (FARSubpart 13.5). The challenge,we felt, would be in convincingISO managers of the Agency thata qualified source could beselected and a contract written asa result of a simplified acquisi-tion. The resulting contractwould provide for the foresee-able ISO requirements of theAgency and would also be opento other government agencies aswell.

Since the service was consid-ered to be a commercial item andthe estimated dollar value under$5M, we sensed a great opportu-nity to really take advantage ofthe current authority to use theFAR Subpart 13.5, Test Programfor Certain Commercial Items,that allows the use of SimplifiedAcquisition Procedures (SAP).We based this recommendation

on the fact that this service was aperfect fit for the program. Itwas commercially available andthe scope was well defined.Also, there were numerousqualified sources and the workwas customarily done withcatalog pricing and is perfor-mance based. It was felt thisprocedure would maximizeefficiency and economy in theprocurement process whileminimizing the administrativeburden and costs.

Developing the Statement ofRequirements (SOR) was adifficult task. We decided todevelop the SOR entirely fromscratch. Included in this SORwere items that had not previ-ously been ordered in theoriginal contract, such as theAgencywide Quarterly Review,which provides for the contrac-tor to present a summary of auditfindings from the past quarter,trend analysis, and plannedservices. In addition, sinceindustry practices changedsignificantly since the Agency’sinitial ISO certification effort, itwas necessary to meet withindustry and government repre-sentatives, and visit websites tolearn more about the ISO 9001and registration process.

Performance-Based Con-tracting terminology was usedfor the SOR, defining work interms of output rather than“how” to do the work. SinceISO is an international standard,we included internationalrequirements in the SOR, insteadof only United States standards.This was a unique idea, since asa federal agency, many assumedthat we would use United Statesstandards. Accordingly, the

international requirementallowed vendors worldwide tobid on the contract, as long asthey were members of arecognized internationalaccreditation body.

We planned a fixed priceand indefinite quantity order,which are two contract typesallowable for commercialitems. We wanted to allowflexibility in the Schedule ofSupplies and Services. Theindefinite quantity items weredesigned to allow the sites/centers to order additionalservices, such as auditor days.

An SF 1449, Solicitation/Contract/Order For Commer-cial Items, was used for thesolicitation and award. Solici-tation provisions (including theinstructions to the offerors)and attachments were includedin the SF 1449, and wereremoved upon purchase orderaward. The evaluation wouldbe based on best value, and theevaluation factors would betechnical, price, and pastperformance. Because wewere using Simplified Acquisi-tion Procedures, we did nothave to state the relativeimportance assigned to eachevaluation factor, and we werenot required to use subfactors.We did not provide detailedinformation on what would berequired technically. Theofferors were free to provideany information necessary forus to evaluate their offer.There is ISO guidance for therecommended number of auditdays based on employee countand other factors, so we wereassured of having someuniformity in comparingproposal costs. Offerors could

Summer 2001 page 5

submit product literature, andwe did not include a proposalpage limitation. Finally,offerors were told to use theirbest judgment in preparingtheir proposal.

Many of our ideas regard-ing the RFQ, SOR, Schedule ofSupplies and Services, andevaluation process were new toour technical users. TheNASA technical communitywas familiar with the SourceEvaluation Board procedures,and did not understand SAP.To overcome all of this, weprepared written instructions tothe evaluators on FAR andNFS requirements regardingthe evaluation process underSAP, and informed them thatSimplified Acquisition Proce-dures did not have complicatedtechniques found in other typesof procurement.

Because all interestedparties were not located at thesame site (thirteen NASA sites/centers were involved),electronic methods, telephone,and fax were used to theirfullest to communicate.Comments on the SOR weresolicited from HQ and ISOcenter representatives usinge-mail or telephone, instead ofhaving everyone meet. We e-mailed the procurementschedule to NASA representa-tives so that they were in-formed of the progress of theprocurement. Questions orcomments from industryrepresentatives were quicklyposted on the web, so that allofferors had access to the sameinformation. The evaluationswere conducted using tele-phone, fax, and e-mail. Byusing this method, we believewe saved time and money, and

since all parties could review theinformation at their convenience,we think we also received abetter product. On October 18,2000, we awarded the order toNational Quality Assurance,USA, only 33 days after pro-posal receipt.

Now that the order isawarded, we can see the benefitsof careful planning. Otherfederal agencies have inquiredabout being included on thecontract, and have praised us onour foresight, hard work, andknowledge of registrar activities.Since we now have one registrarfor the entire Agency, ISO 9001site/center representatives canexchange information, knowingthere will be consistency inauditing philosophy across thesites/centers. Additionally, withthe Agencywide QuarterlyReview, we can identify trendsamong the sites/centers thatshould be addressed on anagency basis. White Sands TestFacility will use NQA for itsISO 14001 registration, assuringfurther consistency and eliminat-ing duplication of work, sinceISO 9001 and ISO 14001 havecommon elements to be audited.

This acquisition was aninteresting and learning experi-ence for all involved. It illus-trated for us that the non-traditional procurement methodscould work well for our require-ments. If others have projectsthat they feel might be candi-dates for Simplified AcquisitionProcedures, we encourage themto try it out. We would be happyto discuss our experience withthem. You can contact me at(216) 433-8293.

Good IDEASbegin at Ames

Jeff Brown and RhondaBaker, both Contract Specialistsin the Acquisition Branch forCenter Operations and Space atAmes Research Center, wereselected to participate in an ARCtraining program entitled “Inter-active Development of Engi-neers, Administrators, andScientists” (IDEAS). This is aone-year residential trainingprogram that provides a uniqueopportunity for career growthand development that is avail-able only to a small number ofstaff who have 18 months to 3years experience at Ames and isdesigned to orient and acceleratethe assimilation of neweremployees into the Amesculture.

The IDEAS Program isaimed at better integrating newprofessionals into the workforceat Ames Research Center,creating a setting to network,share ideas, and gain knowledgeand insight through a number ofinteractions with fellow profes-sionals in a team buildingenvironment. Group membersparticipate in brainstormingexercises, small group presenta-tions, large group discussions,and group dynamics exercises.Additionally, senior employeesparticipate in this program andserve as mentors, who share theirexperiences and provide infor-mation about the Center, itswork, and values to help neweremployees identify with Ames.

Jeff and Rhonda have beenat Ames since January 1998.They are participating in SessionVIII of the IDEAS programwhich began January 2001.

Summer 2001 page 6

Procuring It Through GSABy Lisa M. Harvey, Langley Research Center

Langley Research Centerrecently awarded a majorservice contract for Consoli-dated Information TechnologyServices (ConITS) utilizingGSA to get the job done! As aresult of employee shortages,the concept of “better, faster,cheaper” becomes paramount.Currently, Langley’s ITservices are provided throughtwo contract vehicles: ODIN(which, of course, everyone isaware of) and ConITS, whichwas awarded by GSA onbehalf of LaRC. ODINprovides general purposedesktop systems and support,while ConITS provides supportfor uniquely configured andhighly specialized systems. Inaddition, ConITS provides abroad range of InformationTechnology (IT) services forbusiness and scientific applica-tions. These services includesystems administration,systems maintenance, databaseadministration, customersupport, and development ofnew software and modifica-tions to existing software. Thevalue of the CPAF contract is$183.8M for 8.25 years (1-yearbase with options).

This procurement waschallenging and unique inmany ways. It represented aconsolidation of the majorityof non-ODIN IT servicespreviously provided underthree separate contracts.Development in the IT worldtoday seems to be happeningovernight. With business andscientific computing becomingmore aligned than in the “olddays,” it made sense to con-solidate these procurements. It

is expected that efficiencies,synergy, cost savings, economiesof scale, and consistency inservice will be the final result ofthe consolidation.

The ConITS procurementrepresented a significant chal-lenge from several standpoints,particularly schedule. LaRCexperienced difficulty gettingthe consolidated IT contractstarted because of problems inreaching a consensus on theacquisition strategy and becauseof Civil Service IT personnelshortages that were exacerbateddue to the ODIN competition.However, the team did notaccept a short procurementschedule as a reason to becomplacent. The team managedto make effective use of CCI;extensively used electroniccommerce; set a new standard ofopenness with industry; providedperformance-based contractingtraining for the procurementusers; and set up an efficientelectronic process for handlingtasks, complete with templates,samples, instructions, andrepresentative metrics. Thisteam looked past the award andalso focused on making thecontract administration efficient.

Some of the benefits utiliz-ing GSA, combined with theacquisition streamlining tech-niques used by the ConITSevaluation team, are outlinedbelow:

a. Consolidated Con-tracting Initiative: Rather thanawarding a separate contract forour requirement, LaRC decidedto use the GSA Millenniacontracts for ConITS. Langleyhad good experience using theGSA Millennia contract on a

previous procurement, and itrepresented a perfect fit whenconsidering scope, contract type,and the list of prequalified firms.In addition, the Millenniaprocedures would permit astreamlined evaluation andaward. The evaluation was ateam effort between GSA andNASA. NASA performed theevaluation of the Technical andPast Performance Factors andGSA performed the evaluation ofthe Cost Factor. The selectionwas made by GSA after consulta-tion with NASA. GSA will serveas the Contracting Officer for theConITS Task Order, but Langleywill play a major role in adminis-tration of the Task Order effort.Both GSA and NASA found ourcollaboration to be extremelyeffective, and considered thisprocurement to be a CCI success.

b. Interface and In-volvement of Industry: GSAdoes not require the use of draftsolicitations under Millennia andthe short lead-time for thisprocurement could have beenused as an excuse not to provideone. Nevertheless, the team wascommitted to obtaining goodcompetition for this consolidatedprocurement. Therefore, a draftTask Order Request (TOR) wasreleased to industry and theirresponses were incorporated intothe final TOR, where appropri-ate. Even though not required, apre-solicitation conference wasalso held following the release ofthe draft solicitation.

In addition to an “open-door”policy maintained until the dateof the final TOR release, a two-week Due Diligence period wasestablished. During this period,

(continued on last page)

Summer 2001 page 7

Insidethe

BeltwayBy Becky Barth, GoddardSpace Flight Center, on detailto HQ Program Operations

You wouldn’t think that17 miles would make such abig difference, but it does!

I came to Code H fromGoddard Space Flight Centerin May 2000 under theAgency’s Professional Devel-opment Program (PDP). SinceI am “local,” I didn’t have torelocate my family, but I didrelocate my perspective. Icame to Headquarters with aCenter-oriented view of theworld, and a Code Y center atthat. For some time, I hadthought it would be extremelyuseful from a career develop-ment standpoint for me to seewhat goes on elsewhere in theAgency. Up to that time, I hadhad lots of experience workingon procurements for earthscience programs but didn’thave much of an appreciationfor what life was like at any ofthe other centers or at Head-quarters.

Since I’ve been in Code H,I have split my time betweenthe Procurement OperationsDivision and the AnalysisDivision. In the ProcurementOperations Division, I’veparticipated in procurementmanagement surveys andprocessed actions requiringHQ review. In January 2001,NASA collaborated with theAir Force to conduct a reviewof the Joint-Base OperationsSupport Contract (J-BOSC) atKSC. This was a chance forme to examine a program thatis jointly run by the twoagencies. It gave me a betterappreciation for the uniquechallenges associated withcombining into one cohesiveplan two management ap-proaches that have somefundamental similarities as

well as fundamental differences.I also attended acquisitionstrategy and procurement officerone-on-one meetings, whichallowed me to see the decision-making process at work.

In the Analysis Division,I’ve worked in the SponsoredResearch Business Activity(SRBA) on grants initiatives.

Since my background is incontracts, it was quite an enlight-ening experience to participateon some interagency committeesdesigned to streamline processesfor federal grantees in responseto the 1999 Federal FinancialAssistance Management Im-provement Act. NASA obligatessignificantly more dollars oncontracts than on grants, and itwas an eye-opener for me thatmany agencies primarily awardfinancial assistance instrumentssuch as grants and cooperativeagreements. In addition tomeeting with other federalagencies on grants issues, I alsoattended meetings of severalorganizations that focus onstrengthening the relationshipsof grantee organizations withgrantors. In addition to attend-ing local meetings such as theFederal Demonstration Partner-ship, I attended the annual

meeting of the Society of Re-search Administrators in St.Louis, and spoke at the NationalSummit on Grants and Contractsfor University Research andDevelopment in the spring. Ialso got to participate in GeneralSam Armstrong’s webcast thatfocused on procurement matters.During the webcast I sat back-stage to receive and research‘live’ e-mail questions fromparticipants before handing themoff to Diane Thompson, SRBAmanager and webcast monitor.That was my first experience inthe tremendous planning effortthat goes into a joint TV/Internetwebcast production and all in all,I thought it was pretty neat!

When I met my fellowPDPers in the Class of 2000/2001, I found it not surprisingthat the majority had technicalbackgrounds. I participated in anumber of training eventsassociated with the PDP year,which have supplemented myHeadquarters procurementexperience and given me ampleopportunity to get to know myclassmates. Many PDPers arespending part or all of their PDPassignment here at Headquartersand I’ve learned a lot about whathappens in their ‘host’ organiza-tions at our shared experiencesessions. As a class, we havereceived briefings from most ofthe Agency’s Associate Adminis-trators, who have shared anoverview of the activities theyare responsible for. Along withmy fellow PDPers, I attended thecongressional operations briefingoffered by GeorgetownUniversity’s Government Affairslast September as well as aDecember seminar offered

(continued on page 11)

Summer 2001 page 8

A closer look:A closer look:

Follow the Leader……………..By Ann Sharpe, Stennis Space Center

Have you ever been in aweof and inspired by someoneyou’ve never met? In pursuit ofyour own personal career path,have you ever felt that you keptbumping into the career ofsomeone you didn’t really know,but that you’d heard about foryears? I have. Now I work forthat person.

Several years ago when Ibegan my first position with thegovernment as a procurementclerk for Naval OceanographicOffice’s Small Purchase Branchat the National Space Technol-ogy Laboratories (now known asthe Stennis Space Center), Iheard much talk about the personwho’d held the position just priorto me. The conversationscontained much admiration,respect and even a little tinge ofenvy. This small group wascomprised primarily of youngindividuals who had always livedwithin the local area. Fromamong their midst, here was aperson who had the drive, ability,and ambition to seek out abrighter, more meaningful future.This individual was even braveenough to move away from hersecure environment, leavingfamily, friends and even heroffice buddies, to relocate to astrange and foreign land –Orlando, Florida.

This was the first of manysteps for Rebecca (Becky)Dubuisson, each becoming morepronounced as her career advanced.

Becky graduated from DeltaState University with a BBA inBusiness Management. Armedwith this degree, she entered theNavy’s Civilian Intern Programwith the Naval Materiel Com-mand — first at Orlando, then in

Charleston, South Carolina.While in Orlando, Beckyadvanced her education with aMasters in Business Administra-tion and her career as a contractspecialist. Next, Becky movedon to serve on the ProcurementManagement Survey Team at theNaval Supply Center (NSC) inCharleston. At this time, Beckywas part of a team that auditedthe various NAVSUP FieldOffices, including our Navycontracts office. From Charles-ton, Becky transferred to theNaval Supply Systems Com-mand (NAVSUP) Headquartersin Washington, DC, as a pro-curement analyst.

Over the years, those of uswho remained at the NavalOceanographic Office watchedin awe as Becky moved aroundthe country and upward with hercareer. She was a role model tomany of us, and we took theinitiative to enroll in nightclasses at the local college.

Eventually, with a collegebackground, I stepped to theedge – applying for entry-levelcontract specialist positions withboth NASA and with the NavalResearch Laboratory procure-ment offices at Stennis. At thistime, I learned that Becky hadalso applied for positions withinthe same organizations. Beckywas hired by NASA-SSC as aprocurement analyst. She movedback home to Mississippi; whileI was at the threshold of myupward career climb as a con-tract specialist for the Navy.

Becky has made a greatdifference within the NASA-SSC Procurement Office withher varied background experi-ences and strong leadershipabilities. She took on and

expanded the SADBU office –reaching out to the local smalland small disadvantagedbusinesses; holding confer-ences and other sessions forthem; and encouraging andpromoting their involvementwith Stennis. This strongbeginning is still reflected eachyear as Stennis continuallyexceeds NASA’s goals in allsocioeconomic areas. She wasinstrumental in aligning andadvancing the organization ofStennis’ Procurement Office asa whole, receiving manyhonors and awards in herpositions of procurementanalyst, senior contract special-ist. Then she went on to beDeputy Procurement Officer ofNASA-SSC’s ProcurementOffice in 1997.

In the meantime, I myselflearned to push forward andobtained my Masters degree aswell as position of seniorcontract specialist with theNavy. Finally, having reacheda stage in my career seekingchange, I applied for a positionwith NASA-SSC in 1999.Becky was a member of thepanel who interviewed me.This was the first time in allthese years that I’d ever spokenwith Becky. I was impressedwith her friendly and genuinesmile, as well as her humorouspersonality — making me feelat ease during the interview.

Now, two years later, weare still working together.Rebecca S. Dubuisson is nowthe Procurement Officer of ourever-growing and challengingOffice here at Stennis. She isan inspiring leader and mentorto our entire staff.

Summer 2001 page 9

Getting the Job Done!Getting the Job Done!

Life & The Learning Curve: Jacklyn NormanBy David Culp, Kennedy Space Center

What happens when theProcurement Office deter-mines that it is in need of moreContract Specialists and fewerCost/Price Analysts? Well,the incumbent “Pricers” getanother “learning opportu-nity.” And Jackie Norman hadone of those opportunitiesbeginning in February 1998.

Having grown up inWashington, DC, it wascertainly no surprise thatJackie would pursue a careerwith the government. Shebegan government servicewith the Naval ResearchLaboratory in Orlando, andeventually landed at NASAKennedy Space Center inSeptember 1990.

Jackie has spent themajority of her career inprocurement and became aPricer in March 1992. Shewas KSC’s nominee for PriceAnalyst of the Year for 1994,after preparing the costanalysis of the $1.4B follow-on contract for Shuttle Logis-tics. But if you ask her abouther pricing experiences, themost challenging ones weredealing directly with construc-tion contractors. Most weresmall businesses that didn’thave much experience dealingwith the government. Some-times the interaction requiredteaching the contractors thebasics of determining indirectrates and preparing proposals.

However, this challengewas nothing compared to the“learning opportunity” Jackiehad under the category of“other duties as assigned.”During the absence of theNASA Associate ExchangeOperations Manager, Jackie

encountered all aspects of projectmanagement in being responsiblefor the preparation, opening, andmanagement of the KSC ChildDevelopment Center. Until aqualified candidate was selected,she performed independentmanagement of the facility andacted in the capacity of theAdministrator, which includedresponsibility for financialmanagement, program planning,personnel staffing, employee andparent conferences, construction/maintenance scheduling, andcommunication installation andtraining. During this periodJackie had to address securityissues, complaints, and concerns.

If you ask her what shelearned from this experience,Jackie will be the first one to tellyou she learned a great dealabout what it would take to starta business, but she wouldn’trecommend Child Care. By thetime the KSC Child Care facilityacquired an Administrator, Jackiewas grateful to get back to theProcurement Office and Pricing.

When the time came totransition from Pricing, it seemedlike culture shock since the dutiesof a Contract Specialist are morediverse – and sometimes moretrying. But, just as her currentsupervisor in the Mission SupportOffice counseled, Jackie discov-ered she had more knowledgeabout the job than she realized.

Before much time elapsed,Jackie was preparing solicitationsfor Best Value Midrange pro-curements, and was subsequentlyKSC’s nominee as Midrange/Commercial Person of the Yearfor 2000. She received thesehonors after awarding contractsfor the Main Console Enclosuresand the Test Conductor Console

Enclosures in the FiringRooms, and for the InfraredHydrogen Fire DetectionCameras. Along with twoother Contract Specialists inthe Mission Support Office,she received a KSC CenterDirector’s Gold Quality Dollaraward for Customer Service asa result of their team attitudeand a team effort with custom-ers.

Just about the time Jackiewas getting comfortable withthe job requirements andresponsibilities, another“learning opportunity” came.Jackie now serves as one of theKSC Contracting Officers forthe Space Flight OperationsContract, in support of theSpace Shuttle Program at JSC.She’s rapidly discovering thatthere are many more aspects tocontract administration thanthe FAR explains. This newchallenge brings with it theopportunity to deal with issuesabout the Shuttle hardwareitself, and Jackie is excitedabout being this close to themissions.

Jackie will tell anyone whoasks that she really enjoyslearning. (As a matter of fact,she got her MBA after comingto NASA.) But with all the“learning opportunities” shehas had in Procurement, she’sbeginning to wonder if sheshould start keeping this asecret.

Even though she and herhusband Jim (who also worksat KSC) border on beingworkaholics at times, they haveplenty to keep them busy athome. They ride horses andentertain their 3-year-oldgrandson as often as possible.

Summer 2001 page 10

prime contract and JPL busi-ness system surveillance; andserves as the supervisor of theNMO Contracts ManagementStaff (CMS).

CMS

The CMS responsibilitiesinclude awarding task orderson the prime contract, perform-ing contract administration,providing consent to JPLsubcontracts, administering theaward fee process, performingaudit liaison functions, andcontract close-out. This primecontract is a five-year, cost-plus-award-fee contract that isestimated at +$1 billion peryear. The CMS is both the“Procuring ContractingOfficer” and the “Administra-tive Contracting Officer” forJPL, which includes formulat-ing and negotiating the primecontract in addition to monitor-ing contract performance.Since the prime contract wasawarded in September of 1998,the CMS has issued over 5,400task order actions, ranging invalue from $2K to $800M. Anew contract is awarded everyfive years and requires 2 yearsof negotiations and prepara-tion. The NMO also awardsand manages a number of othercontracts involving the DeepSpace Network, the LunarPlanetary Institute, and grantswith universities. Addition-ally, the NMO is delegatedlocal contract administrationfor the Consolidated SpaceOperations Contract for theGoldstone facility.

The variety and complex-ity of the CMS workload is

What’s it all about:What’s it all about:

The NASA Management Office at JPL –

By Suzan Moody, NASA Management Office

So, is it JPL or NMO? It canbe confusing. Sometimeseveryone refers to the entireoperation out here as JPL, butthat’s only part of the story. TheNMO is the on-site federalrepresentative overseeing themanagement of the prime con-tract with the California Instituteof Technology (Caltech) for theoperation of the Jet PropulsionLaboratory (JPL) – NASA’s onlyFederally Funded Research andDevelopment Center. JPL is aGovernment-Owned-Contractor-Operated facility, with Caltech asthe contractor. JPL is frequentlytreated as a NASA Center. TheNMO plays a very important partin the running of JPL. The NMOconsists of three main divisions:The Director’s Office, theTechnology Transfer Section,and the Contracts ManagementSection. The NMO is staffed byonly 25 NASA civil servants.These civil servants are a fieldelement of NASA Headquarters,Code S (Office of Space Sci-ence). The Space ScienceEnterprise’s mission is: “Dis-cover how the universe beganand evolved, how we got here,where we are going, and whetherwe are alone.”

The Director’s Office

Dr. Robert Parker has beenthe Director of the NMO fornearly four years. Dr. Parker hashad a long career at NASAincluding as a former astronaut.Dr. Parker has also served invarious leadership capacities atNASA Headquarters, includingDirector of the Spacelab andOperations Program and Man-ager of the Space Operations

Utilization Program. Dr. Parkerearned a doctorate in Astronomyfrom Caltech.

Dr. Parker’s responsibilitiesinclude representing NASA’sinterests to senior JPL andCaltech officials; providingleadership and coordination ofNASA’s efforts for the JPLPerformance Evaluation; andperforming managerial tasks forthe NMO including organiza-tional management, personnelmanagement, safety and healthrequirements, and the develop-ment and budget of resources.The NMO Director’s Office alsoincludes management of theDiscovery Program, PropertyManagement, Security, andEnvironment divisions.

Tech Transfer

The NMO TechnologyTransfer Section’s goal is tocommercialize AerospaceTechnology for use on Earth toimprove the economic base ofthe country. This section alsoprovides technical review forreimbursable task orders placedon the JPL prime contract andmanages the Small BusinessInnovative Research program.

Carl C. Weber is the NMOProcurement Officer and is anemployee of the NASA HQOffice of Procurement. Carlwas recently promoted to thisposition from JSC. He leads thegovernment team for periodicprime contract negotiations;ensures compliance with con-tract terms and conditions(accounting, procurementsystems, audit resolution);serves as the Cognizant Govern-ment Contracting Officer for the

Diverse Acquisition Experience in an Essential Office

Summer 2001 page 11

quite astounding consideringthat it is handled by a smallcontracting staff. This staffconsists of only five ContractingOfficers (Angel Castillo, RobertDemoch, Kathleen Huddleston,Doe Huff, and VeronicaStickley), three Contract Spe-cialists (Dave Foxton, PamelaJackson, and Suzan Moody), aProcurement Assistant (LydiaCasarez), and the ProcurementOfficer (Carl Weber). Together,the CMS is a close-knit group ofacquisition professionals, withover 160 years of combinedacquisition experience.

The People

Work assignments at theNMO offer a unique blend ofacquisition experience. AngelCastillo is most enthusiasticabout his current assignmentinvolving the implementation ofNASA’s International Agree-ment with the Government ofAustralia for the operation of theTracking Station at the CanberraDeep Space CommunicationComplex. This project isparticularly interesting becauseof the challenges in structuringand negotiating an internationalcontractual arrangement. RobertDemoch serves as the Contract-ing Officer for the Mars programand works with JSC on theConsolidated Space OperationsContract. Bob is also theNMO’s ISO 9000 guru.Kathleen Huddleston has skill inInformation Technology con-tracting, and manages the JPLResearch and TechnologyOperating Plans. Doe Huffspecializes in JPL procurement

policies and procedures, smallbusiness initiatives, and facilitycontracting. Veronica Stickley isan experienced acquisitionmanager with extensive knowl-edge of the direct task orderprocess. Dave Foxton monitorsJPL with regard to labor lawsand subcontracting processes.Pam Jackson had a distinguishedcareer with the DCMC prior tocoming to NASA and serves in avariety of contract administrationfunctions including contractcloseout and reimbursable taskorder contracting. Pam has abroad knowledge of computersystems and is monitoring thedevelopment of new softwareprograms. Suzan Moody works inPolicy and negotiates with JPLon NASA policies relating to riskmanagement and environmentalexecutive orders. JPL’s dualstatus as a center and contractorcreates innovative challenges forcontracting policy. Suzan alsoserves as the Audit LiaisonRepresentative and processesReimbursable Task Orders.Lydia Casarez is the CMS’sindispensable Office Manager.Lydia has a wide range of talentsincluding designing the newNMO web page. Lydia is arecent recipient of a NASAHeadquarters Secretary/ClericalAward for Exceptional Adminis-trative Support.

NMO plays a vital functionat JPL. In turn, JPL supports theOffice of Space Science by beingthe lead US center for the roboticexploration of the solar system.JPL’s activities embrace theoperation of Solar SystemExploration, Earth Sciences,

Astrophysics, and Deep SpaceNetworks. In 2000, JPL had aworkforce of about 5,000 em-ployees and on-site contractors,and an annual budget of approxi-mately $1.315 billion.

Dr. Charles Elachi becamethe new director of JPL in Mayof 2001. JPL’s customersinclude NASA HQ, NASAcenters, other Governmentsponsors, and commercialentities. NASA funds about 96%of JPL’s budget. The NMO isco-located with JPL at a 177 acresite at the foot of the San GabrielMountains near the Rose Bowl inPasadena, CA. JPL is locatednear the city of Los Angeles. Tolearn more about JPL, pleaseconsult the JPL web site at: http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/.

(continued from page 7)

locally by two UCLA professorson innovation and creativity inthe workplace. Most recently,we participated in training onstrategy development in largeorganizations at the Army WarCollege in Carlisle, PA, whichincorporated analysis of theeffects of strategic decisionsduring the Battle of Gettysburg.

All in all, I’ve learned a greatdeal more about the Agency’sprocurement and non-procure-ment activities as a result of myexperience at Headquarters. Thegreater our understanding of thespecific challenges facing otherorganizations, the better we willbe able to break down barriers toeffectiveness.

Inside theBeltway

Summer 2001 page 12

Integrated Financial Management Programand the Procurement ProfessionalBy Michael McCarty, Kennedy Space Center

Mention the IntegratedFinancial Management (IFM)Program to someone in NASAprocurement and see what thereaction is! It may range from anexpressionless deer-in-the-headlights look (like where areyou going with this) to a look ofimpatience (like I’ve got some-where else to be).

One thing is certain, IFMwill affect every NASA procure-ment professional and, mostlikely, more than once. By now,almost everyone in procurementhas at least heard the acronymIFM. Most of us know some-thing is coming: some mayactually know what the some-thing is, many may erroneouslythink that whatever it is, it is onlyfor NASA accountants; othersmay not have any clue at all as towhat IFM is!

The Old

Until little more than a yearago, the IFM Program strived tosatisfy a wide array of NASA’sbusiness requirements all at onetime – “the big bang approach.”The effort was far-reaching andincluded teams for procurement,finance, travel, budget formula-tion, time and attendance, and anexecutive information system. Itended in the spring of 2000 andis referred to herein as the “old”team.

About two years ago, whenthe old IFM Procurement teamwas looking for contract special-ists to participate in the testing ofthe procurement software, I haveto admit that I kept my headdown and tried not to make eyecontact! Then, hearing thattesting would occur at MSFC and

it would be during the summer, Ivolunteered for the good of theAgency! It was only supposedto be a three week tour, but youknow how that goes!

For three weeks in thesummer of 1999, a group ofAgencywide NASA procurementpeople ran simulated procure-ments on newly configuredsoftware. I wish we had videos!This testing provided greatinsight into the shortcomings of

the software! Viewing myself asa somewhat creative contractspecialist, with the ability tocrash any software to which I amexposed, this turned out to be agreat experience. That was howI met Sheryl Goddard (HQ),Procurement Team Lead; JaneMaples (MSFC), Deputy Pro-curement Team Lead; and theirimpressive Agencywide team. Ialso periodically met some otherinteresting characters who spokea different (non-procurement)language and soon learned theywere accountants who weresimultaneously trying to imple-ment the other (finance, travel,budget, and time and attendance)portions of IFM.

As history shows, wecontinued to test the softwareover the following severalmonths. During my trips to

MSFC over those months, Iwitnessed the heroic efforts ofSheryl, Jane, and their procure-ment team, as well as the othergroups. I saw them labortirelessly to make the softwarework, and I did what I could tohelp. The software neverworked right despite theirefforts, hard work, heartache,and pain. As a result, in thespring of 2000, work wasstopped on the old IFM “bigbang approach.”

The New

Immediately after the oldIFM was stopped, the new IFMwas re-planned and initiated asa modular approach. Ratherthan a single comprehensiveapproach, the new IFM Pro-gram identified 14 modules tobe carried out as projectsincrementally and each pilotedat a specific center prior toroll-out to the Agency. Atleast two of these projects willbe familiar to NASA procure-ment professionals. They arethe Core Financial Project,located at MSFC, and theProcurement ManagementModule Requirements Teamled by Steve Miley of NASAHeadquarters Code H. Ex-amples of other IFM projectsinclude time and attendance,budget formulation, payrolland logistics, as well aspathfinder projects such asrésumé management and travelmanagement. Further informa-tion on the IFM Program, aswell as projects that have beeninitiated, can be found at:http://www.ifmp.nasa.gov/

Summer 2001 page 13

Core Financial Project(Purchasing) vs. Pro-curement Management

The IFM Program deter-mined that the Core FinancialProject would be the systembackbone for IFM and neededto be initiated immediately.Procurement Management onthe other hand, while veryimportant to the Agency, wasasked to wait its turn.

The Core Financial Projectwas quickly formed at MSFCand requirements were draftedto enable an acquisition ofcommercial software fromGSA’s Federal Supply Sched-ule. (Procurements are alwaysdone in a hurry, right?)

After we stopped work lastspring on the old IFM, I knewNASA was re-planning whatto do next, but I thought Iwouldn’t hear anything aboutIFM for at least a little while.I was wrong! Within a monthof ending the previous effort,my old MSFC friend, JaneMaples, Deputy ProcurementTeam Lead on the old IFM,was now the Team Lead forthe new Agencywide CoreFinancial Purchasing Teamand needed people to helpwrite requirements. I felt Icouldn’t refuse when I discov-ered the location of thisrequirements drafting effortwas going to be at my homecenter, Kennedy Space Center.

The Core Financialrequirements include capabili-ties for purchasing, as well asbudget execution, cost man-agement, accounts payable,and other areas very special to

CFOs. In writing the purchasingrequirements, the Agencywideteam had to navigate what toinclude in Core FinancialPurchasing versus what to leavefor Procurement Management.Core Financial requirementsnaturally include capabilities tocapture obligations that ourContracting Officers frequentlymake since the software willrecord the financial impacts ofthese obligations. The scope ofCore Financial also includespurchase requisitions, since thatis where the financial impactsrelated to commitments arerecorded. These were thepurchasing requirements easiestto determine as appropriate forcommercial Core Financialsoftware. Other requirements,such as end-to-end bankcardfunctionality, were included inthe scope of Core Financial, butconspicuously absent weredocument generation system(DGS) requirements, such assolicitation and contract writingtools so desperately needed bymany centers. Market researchshowed that DGS requirementswere not accommodated incommercial Core Financialsoftware. Therefore, it wouldneed to be covered by a subse-quent IFM Project, ProcurementManagement. Also awaitingProcurement Management willbe NF 507s. While someprocurement data elements willbe captured in the Core Finan-cial software, many will not. So,while the Core Financial soft-ware will capture every obliga-tion amount, small or large,incurred by a ContractingOfficer or bankcard holder, the

extent of generating documentsand capturing/reporting NF 507data will be very limited.

Core FinancialImplementation

In September 2000, NASAselected SAP Public Sector andEducation, Inc. of Washington,DC, to provide their commercialCore Financial software. SAPhas an extensive customer basewith 12,000 customers currentlyusing its software. Only twomonths later, MSFC selectedAccenture, which has more than750 successful SAP implementa-tions to its credit, as the CoreFinancial Project’s Implementa-tion Contractor. The messagehere is that NASA now hasproven software and a provenimplementation contractor. Butremember, IFM is not aboutsoftware, it’s about positivechanges in NASA’s business andadministrative processes that willprovide better information fordecision-making.

Your Agencywide CoreFinancial Purchasing team,including Accenture members,has been diligently molding ourprocesses to leverage the capa-bilities of the commercialsoftware, what insiders call“Agency Design!” Does thesoftware accommodate all of ourcurrent procurement processes?Absolutely not. Will we changeour processes? Absolutely yes aswe want to take advantage of thecapabilities and business processbest practices offered by thesoftware.

(continued on page 17)

Summer 2001 page 14

centers seem like a stroll in thepark!

I spent a fascinating yearlearning about launch vehiclesand range policy - the closestI’m ever going to come to beinga rocket scientist. But moreimportant than the job specificlearning, I got to see another sideof our industry. I got a differentperspective on how things workin Washington.

One thing that surprised me,AIA makes no political or othercontributions to candidates,parties or other causes. As I said,their role as a trade association isto represent their members’views on matters of public policy– both national and international.For that reason, this makes thema valuable resource when tryingto determine what the “industry”position is. If there’s a proposedpolicy or rule, a report or otherproject where industry input isdesired, comment from AIA willrepresent an industry consensusview that’s been vetted throughtheir member companies. I sawby working the process myself,that the consensus position islikely to be significantly differentthan the position I might con-clude is the “consensus” fromreviewing submissions fromseveral different individualcompanies. Essentially, AIAgets industry members to think interms of a collective industryposition versus what position isbest for their individual compa-nies. This “cat herding” functioncan be a big help to the govern-ment when soliciting industryviews on business and procure-ment policies and practices.

Understanding BothSides

There is significant overlapof government and industryinterests. For instance, one ofAIA’s “Top 10” issues is toincrease government R&Dspending. While there, I workedwith NASA officials to identifyareas of research which arecurrently underfunded. I alsohelped develop a case forreturning control of satelliteexports to the CommerceDepartment after Congresstransferred export licensing tothe State Department followingthe incident of possible technol-ogy transfer to China. Theimpacts of this policy changehave had widespread negativeeconomic and scientific reper-cussions. Many of the horrorstories of how this has nega-tively impacted internationalcollaborative research comefrom NASA investigators.

There was another eye-opening experience. As apolitical science major, I naivelybelieved that legislation isactually drafted by congressionalstaffs and committees. Well,some of it is, but in fact, a goodportion of public policy legisla-tion is drafted by trade associa-tions who then find a congres-sional sponsor for their bill. Acouple of good examples ofindustry generated legislationare The Spaceport InvestmentAct, and some of the recentexport control legislation.

In June of 2000, Congresspassed legislation establishing aCommission on the Future ofAerospace. The amendment tothe Defense Authorization Actwas sponsored by Senator Joe

Lieberman. What I foundfascinating is that establishingthis commission is the work ofAIA. John Douglas, Presidentof AIA, saw a need to increasethe national focus on space anddecided a commission wouldbe an effective method to focusthe new administration onaerospace issues. AIA thenwrote the legislation proposingthe commission, built congres-sional support for it, anddeveloped a roster of potentialcommission members and ashort-list for the commissionhead. Position papers andbackground packages weredeveloped to provide to thecommission once it’s formed.Not the way I learned it is inschool - another bubble burst.

The Real World

Not only did I find that the“real world” is very differentfrom what I learned in school,it’s also different from what Ilearned here in the govern-ment. At NASA, I believedthat conflict of interest “pro-tections” are unquestionablygood. Given the opportunity tobe privy to discussions con-cerning possible politicalappointments, I found thatmany of these “protections” donothing so much as limit theleadership genepool. Now, Isee it as a common form ofgovernmental over-regulation.One or two high profilenegative events and we windup in over-reaction overdriveand end up with legislativeremedies that create biggerproblems than they solve.

I also got a differentperspective on government

AIA Assignment(continued from page 1)

Summer 2001 page 15

“leveraging” strategies. Forthe last decade or more,NASA, DoD, and othergovernment agencies have seentheir budgets shrink. In anattempt to mitigate the impactsof static or shrinking budgets,we in the government come upwith strategies to get industryto partner with us – share thecosts – in an effort to leverageour dollars. Unfortunately, ifour federal budgets are shrink-ing, our contractors are earningless because there’s lessbusiness to go around. Conse-quently, there are fewercorporate dollars available for

independent R&D. We try toleverage our funds at a point intime where the aerospaceindustry is least able to afford it.I’m not saying leveraging is abad thing or that we shouldn’tattempt it. Share the pain! But Icertainly have a better under-standing of the cost and impactof that strategy on industry. Ifwe ever return to boom times infederal spending, THAT wouldbe the time to maximize ourdollars by leveraging.

I think the opportunity towork on the industry side of thespace business has given me aninvaluable perspective. It’s one

thing to know intellectually thatthere are two sides to every storyand quite another to live on theother side of the story for awhile.I give AIA high marks for theiropenness and candor. I thinkworking with a not-for-profitorganization with an industry-based perspective rather thanindividual company-basedperspective was a big plus.Nonetheless, I believe the chanceto work with industry in any ofthe fellowship or developmentprograms out there is a wonder-ful and rewarding opportunity.Don’t miss it!

HQ Review and Approval of Foreign SuppliersIn order to assure foreign

participation in NASAprograms is carried out inaccordance with applicablerules and regulations, Head-quarters will be involved in

most of these arrangements asthey arise.  Since possibleforeign interest in the fullrange of broad agency an-nouncements and competitiveprocurement solicitations arenot predictable in advance,issues such as export control,Buy American, or “no ex-change of funds” might not beidentified - and review andapproval may not occur - untilthe proposal evaluation phaseof a competitive project.

However, as soon as a foreigninterest is identified, it is impor-tant that all parties understandany potential constraints on

participation.Of course, not all foreign

entities are treated equally, andthe concerns and variety ofpotential relationships cannot besummarized here. But introduc-tory and further referenceinformation on internationaltransactions is available from theInternational Acquisition and

Assistance Mentor, http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/procurement/iaam/index.html.

Because of associated risks,

Headquarters Code I reviews allforeign participation in grantsand cooperative agreements andall procurements over $100,000. Specific clearance procedures aredescribed in NPG 5800.1#1260.12(e)(3) and NFS1835.016-70, 1872.306 and1872.504(c) for Broad AgencyAnnouncements, grants, and

cooperative agreements; andNFS 1825.7002 for contracts.Generally all such actions aresubmitted through Code HS,Program Operations Division.For more information, contactPatrick Flynn atpatrick.flynn@hq.nasa.gov or(202) 358-0460.

Summer 2001 page 16

Management from AlabamaA&M University in Huntsville.Harold is currently supportingthe Center Operations Teamwithin the Science and CenterOperations Support Department.Terry Jones joined MSFC fromMEVATEC Corporation inHuntsville. Terry has a BS inBusiness Administration fromAthens State College and an MSin Management from UAH.Terry is currently supporting theInformation Technology SystemsTeam within the Policy &Information Management De-partment. Emily Kendall joinedMSFC from the Department ofDefense in Wiesbaden, Germany.Emily has a BA in English with aminor in Business Administra-tion from Huntingdon College.She is currently supporting theCenter Operations Team withinthe Science and Center Opera-tions Support Department. BobMartin joined MSFC from theDefense Contract AdministrationCommand. Bob has a BS inBusiness from the University ofAlabama and an MBA in Man-agement from Samford Univer-sity, Birmingham, AL. Bob iscurrently supporting the FlightProjects Team within the SpaceFlight Projects Support Depart-ment. Jennifer McCaghren joinedMSFC from Xontech, Inc. inHuntsville where she was aSenior Contract Administrator.Jennifer has a BS in BusinessAdministration from Auburn andan MS in Acquisition & ContractManagement from FIT. She iscurrently supporting the Technol-ogy Development Projects Teamwithin the Space TransportationSupport Department. KimNewman joined MSFC from the

Military Traffic ManagementCommand in Alexandria, VA.Kim has a BS in BusinessManagement from the Univer-sity of Maryland, an MS inInternational Relations fromTroy State University, and aMaster of Business Administra-tion from the University ofMontana. Kim is currentlysupporting the TechnologyDevelopment Team within theSpace Transportation Depart-ment. Dennis Parton joinedMSFC from the Army Aviationand Missile Command. Dennishas a BA in Business Adminis-tration from Columbia Collegein Columbia, MO. Dennis iscurrently supporting the ScienceTeam within the Science andCenter Operations SupportDepartment. Paul Pickett joinedMSFC from the US Army Corpsof Engineers in Huntsville. Paulhas a Bachelor of BusinessAdministration from MississippiState University with a doublemajor in General Business andMarketing. Paul is currentlysupporting the TechnologyDevelopment Team within theSpace Transportation SupportDepartment. Edgar Sanchezjoined MSFC from the ArmyAviation and Missile Command.Edgar has a BA in Managementfrom the University of Houston-Victoria, TX. Edgar is currentlysupporting the Center Opera-tions Team within the Science &Center Operations SupportDepartment. Jennifer Simmonsjoined MSFC from the ArmyAviation and Missile Command.Jennifer has a BS in bothManagement and Marketingfrom the University of NorthAlabama and also has a Mastersof Business Administration from

Alabama A&M University.She is currently supporting theStructures, Mechanical &Thermal Team within theEngineering Support Depart-ment. Stephen Stewart joinedMSFC from a teaching posi-tion at Bob Jones High School.Stephen’s previous experienceincludes contract specialistresponsibilities with the USArmy and other space-relatedindustries. Stephen has a BAin Education from Texas A&MUniversity and an MBA fromFlorida Institute of Technol-ogy. Stephen is currentlysupporting the MicrogravityTeam within the Science &Center Operations SupportDepartment. Calvin Tubbsjoined MSFC from the DefenseSupply Center Columbus.Calvin has an AA in BusinessAdministration fromConcordia College, and a BSin Business Administrationfrom Alabama A&M Univer-sity. He is currently support-ing the Technology Develop-ment Group within the SpaceTransportation Support De-partment. Terry Ware is aformer contract specialist withMSFC who has returned afterten years as a Mom and apreschool teacher. Terry has aBS in Business Administrationfrom UAH. Terry is currentlysupporting the Avionics,Engineering Systems &Materials Processes & Manu-facturing Team within theEngineering Support Depart-ment. Lee Whalen joinedMSFC from the CAMBERCorporation. Lee has a BA inBusiness Administration fromColumbia College and an MSin Contract Management from

People on the Move(continued from page 3)

Summer 2001 page 17

FIT. Lee is currently support-ing the Advanced Conceptsand Engineering Team withinthe Space TransportationSupport Department. TerryWilkinson joined MSFC fromthe Defense Contract Manage-ment Agency, Huntsville.Terry has a BA in BusinessAdministration/Managementfrom St. Leo College. Terry iscurrently supporting theTechnology DevelopmentProjects Team within theSpace Transportation SupportDepartment.

NMO: FAREWELL –Daniel W. Bromley, NASA

Management Office (NMO)Price Analyst, retired on May30, 2001 after 11 years with theNMO. Dan had over 30 years ofgovernment contract priceanalysis/audit liaison/contractcloseout experience. Dan iscurrently working in AuditRelations for the Los AngelesMetropolitan Transit Authority.

SSC: NEW HIRES – RobHarris who joins SSC as acontract specialist from the AirForce Material Command inOhio.FAREWELLS – All the best toHarold Taulbee and Jerry Misch,both of whom retired recently.Harold was contracting officer

In June 2002, MSFC, thePilot Center for Core Finan-cial, will be the first center tocut-over to SAP. The remain-ing centers will follow suitwithin 12-18 months ofMSFC’s implementation.Future articles will providemore details related to IFM’sCore Financial and the Pro-curement Managementprojects.

To learn more about theIFM’s Core Financial andProcurement ManagementProjects, contact your Center’sprocurement representative(s)shown at right or visit the IFMwebsites (IFM Program athttp://ifmp.nasa.gov/programoffice/program.htmland IFM Core FinancialProject at http://corefinancial.ifmp.nasa.gov/).

and Team Lead, OperationsContracting Division. He hadoverseen landmark contracts forSSC since his arrival from theCorps of Engineers in 1986.Jerry primarily supported ourconstruction contracting require-ments and had been with NASA-SSC since 1982. They are bothmissed.CONGRATULATIONS – SueDupuis on her selection as TeamLead, Support Services Contract-ing Division; Ann Sharpe on herpromotion to a GS-13 SeniorContract Specialist. We alsocongratulate Teri Jackson,contract specialist, who has justreceived her Master’s Degree inBusiness Administration.

IFM Program Procurement OfficeRepresentativesCore Financial Project – Purchasing (CFP); ProcurementManagement (PM)

IFM(continued from page 13)

ARC – CFP: Marie Dorish, Lynn Thomas; PM: ChristineMunroe Lela StawickiDFRC – CFP: Robert Greco; PM: Robert Greco, BrianBowmanGRC – CFP: Doreen Medzi, Mary Lou Guthrie; PM: TomPalisin, Bruce ShumanGSFC – CFP: Rosa Acevedo, Nancy Lockard, Dean Patterson;PM: Rosa Acevedo, Nancy LockardHQ – CFP: Steve Miley, Core Financial Steering CommitteeRep; PM: Steve Miley, Process Team LeadJSC – CFP: Karon Cox, Jim Hyde; PM: Karon Cox, Jim HydeJPL – CFP: Kate Wolf, Pamela Jackson; PM: KathleenHuddleston, Pam JacksonKSC – CFP: Michael McCarty, Carol Cowen; PM: Judy Ross,Marilynn NelsonLaRC – CFP: Todd Lacks, Sandy Ray; PM: To be determinedMSFC – CFP: Jane Maples, Process Team Lead, Terry Jones;PM: Jane MaplesSSC – CFP and PM: Ann Sharpe

Summer 2001 page 18

Procurement Countdown is publishedby NASA’s Office of Procurement.

Editor................Susie Marucci (202) 358-1896susie.marucci@hq.nasa.gov

Procurement Countdown

many prime contractors and subcontractors met the current government task monitors to obtain informa-tion about the requirement. A common set of ground rules for this open door and Due Diligence periodwas provided to all interfacing government personnel to avoid problems. In addition, a web site provid-ing information regarding the Center and incumbent contracts was made available to the Millenniacontractors. These “open-door” techniques resulted in good competition.

c. Oral Proposals: Oral proposals (videotaped too!) were used for most of the technical pro-posal. The use of oral proposals was an effective way to receive proposal information, and gave theteam the opportunity to observe the proposed Key Personnel.

Because the Millennia contractors were pre-qualified by the GSA, the team was able to focus onlyon areas where they might find important discriminators.

d. Early Receipt of Past Performance Data: The team decided to request the Past Performanceproposals two weeks ahead of the rest of the proposal. Although not all offerors responded early, it stillallowed the team to make progress in the evaluation before the oral proposals which helped to expeditethe process.

The evaluation team operated with only 6 voting members. A limited number of expert consultantswere utilized in certain focused areas, such as IT Security and ISO compliance. The number of daysfrom receipt of proposals to award was 68 days!

A final and large benefit associated with the GSA Millennia procurements is that they are notprotestable.

Overall, this was a very good experience. Coordination with GSA worked very well for LaRC andfor GSA. Working with GSA has proven to be a valuable teaming arrangement for both organizations.We have been very fortunate in dealing with GSA. One of the best things that has developed from thisprocurement is the relationship that has developed with GSA. The team that we work with are real prosand very customer oriented. They have even sent invitational travel orders to LaRC for an OP managerto come make a pitch to GSA about LaRC’s mission and projects. This is just one example of howcustomer-oriented they are. At this point, we touch base with each other on a weekly basis making sureeverything is progressing as planned. This was a very good experience and is recommended for centerslooking for a creative way of procuring IT services.

Procuring Through GSA(continued from page 6)

Center Procurement AwardsOops!!!

We inadvertently omitted Gayla C. Warren from the Center Procurement Awards in the last issue.Gayla was the MSFC Procurement Support Person of the Year. Sorry for the confusion.