Center for Government Contracting White Papers

Federal procurement policy should therefore focus less on eliminating intermediaries and more on catalyzing added value from Resellers and ensuring that intermediary compensation reflects demonstrable value creation.

Weapon system operational readiness has been on a steady decline over the last two decades. This decline in readiness rates has been highlighted by the General Accountability Office, the DOW Inspector General, and DOW officials at various levels. Many of the issues affecting readiness are systemic. They are also fixable.

Overall, industry and government need to be educated on the flexibilities of OTAs and how they can operate if used correctly. Education should not be singularly directed to industry or government but to all on an acquisition team, which includes both buyers and sellers.

This research identifies where poor communication between DoD and industry, between DoD and Congress, and internally within DoD is hampering acquisition outcomes

Researchers trained ChatGPT and Grok to analyze Senator Roger Wicker’s FoRGED Act, the transformative defense acquisition bill proposed in Congress.

Researchers at GMU’s Baroni Center on Government Contracting present landmark findings grounded in empirical evidence developed through six real-world case studies

The Greg and Camille Baroni Center for Government Contracting has released a comprehensive analysis on the impact of raising the Micro-Purchase Threshold (MPT) for federal acquisition and small business participation.

Current government acquisition rules are depriving DoD from consistently getting the benefits of the best industry talent, the best commercial capabilities, and quicker transition and deployment of needed capabilities. If the regulatory burden and negative incentives are not addressed head on, no amount of outreach or training will bring businesses back into the defense marketplace—or keep them from leaving. . . . In this decisive decade, acquisition regulations and policy must be streamlined to deliver outcomes and informed by data gathered through continued analysis of the shrinking defense industrial base from multiple perspectives—and most importantly, through difficult conversations with industry partners.

This study sought to identify important trends in DoD’s supplier base and its rates of effective competition and market concentration, and importantly compare these trends with the rest of the federal government and its contractor base.

While the origins of the Small Business Administration’s (SBA) Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB) contracting program and its prime contracting goals date to 1958, the history of the program is one of ebbs and flows. While the SDB appellation has applied at both the prime and subcontracting level, this paper will concern itself with prime contracting opportunities. However, before examining the data on the SDB program, it is important to understand the origins and evolutions of the program, as they provide the context necessary to assess the current performance of the program.