Across the government, there are dozens of law enforcement agencies. From the FBI to the Department of Homeland Security to the lesser-known ones like the Navy’s Master-at-Arms, they all need vehicles to perform their duties, most of which the General Services Administration purchases every year.
Several years ago, almost every one of those enforcement offices wanted their own type of vehicle with specific features.
But in the last few years, GSA brought the community together to create a set of vehicle standards.
“There are a lot of different law enforcement entities across the federal government to standardize vehicle equipment packages, and we settled into 15 different vehicle packages that’s across all the different vehicle types. Standardizing that and consolidating that buying power directly with manufacturers is tremendous,” Christina Kingsland, the assistant commissioner for the Office of Travel, Transportation and Logistics in GSA’s Federal Acquisition Service, said at ACT-IAC’s Executive Leadership Conference in December. “There’s a tremendous amount of change management because standardization is at the core of it. There is a balance between what you can include in your shared services versus what is very inherently unique or something needs to be there. Getting down to what can be standardized is hard work.”
Kingsland’s example of standardizing law enforcement vehicles not only saved the government money, but reduced the time and resources to get vehicles to officers in the field.
GSA manages more than 230,000 vehicles across the government through its leasing program. Kingsland said they also mange fuel cards, telematics contracts and maintenance authorizations.
“We decide when a vehicle should be replaced, to optimize that vehicle’s life cycle and minimize the overall cost,” she said.
GSA’s example of managing the federal fleet of vehicles and coming to a standard with law enforcement agencies is a microcosm of the limited value and the opportunity agencies have to adopt more wide-ranging shared services.
A new report from the Government Accountability Office shows eight agencies, both large and small, are seeing operational efficiencies, cost savings and enhanced cybersecurity from moving to shared services for financial management, human resources, grants management and cybersecurity. Additionally, six of eight agencies surveyed said they are seeing improved service delivery as well.
“For example, Labor officials stated that the federal shared services approach for HR optimizes system integrations by leveraging existing processes. This, in turn, minimizes the need to develop new integration processes from scratch,” GAO stated. “Additionally, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) officials stated that this approach has reduced administrative burden by standardizing processes, leading to improved resource allocation at the agency.”
GAO says the eight agencies surveyed said the “cost savings came via increased economies of scale, saved licensing costs and minimized labor, equipment and operational costs.”
Auditors found that agencies are taking advantage of shared services through the Quality Service Management Office (QSMO) marketplaces, but have room to do more. The Office of Management and Budget launched the QSMO concept in 2019, establishing governance and accountability models that includes oversight boards and standards councils as well as customer agency officials.
The cybersecurity QSMO, which the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency manages, has 167 customers from 96 agencies.
The financial management QSMO, meanwhile, says 134 federal agencies have adopted one or more shared services.
“GSA reported that shared services enable agencies to realign resources — technology, workforce, and funding — back to core mission functions, enhancing their focus on delivering public services. Additionally, GSA reported that agencies may benefit from shared services that manage administrative work, including features to streamline compliance with federal policy and consolidate reporting,” GAO stated. “GSA reported that shared services offer opportunities to align business processes and data across multiple functional areas (such as financial management with procurement) to improve strategic decision making both within and across agencies.”
Despite the progress agencies have made in using shared services over the past 25 years, GAO says there are several key pieces missing from full implementation.
It found six major challenges to further adoption of shared services.
GAO says 6 of 8 agencies said finding services that met their technical, operational or mission-critical needs was harder than expected.
“For example, USDA officials stated that the availability of system controls that allow them to conduct their fiduciary responsibilities limits them from considering some shared solutions,” GAO stated. “Moreover, officials from three of the agencies stated that, because they require solutions capable of supporting their specific requirements, they must often take more time to vet a limited pool of potential solutions.”
GAO says shared service provider performance was another common concern among most of the agencies surveyed.
“For example, an official from one selected agency stated that one cybersecurity federal shared service provider (FSSP) could not deliver an adequate solution that addressed risk management framework shortcomings because it relied on legacy technology. The official noted that the solution provided by the FSSP ‘proved unwieldy’ for the agency’s specific concerns, forcing it to switch to a third-party provider,” GAO stated. “Further, officials from three of these agencies reported concerns about losing direct control over system functionality, reducing their flexibility to automate or customize systems as operational responsibilities require, thereby hindering potential performance needs.”
A consistent theme over the last two-plus decades has been concerns about keeping up with performance and technology requirements.
GAO says 4 of the 5 QSMOs said they struggle to balance competitive rates with having funding to regularly modernize outdated solutions.
“For example, GSA reported that some shared services rely on legacy technologies, which provide limited functionality and restrict opportunities to pursue modernization,” GAO stated. “All five of the coordinating agencies reported that customer agencies face challenges with prioritizing resources. For example, according to Grants QSMO officials, many agencies are largely on their own to determine how to fund IT modernization, including shared services, because no dedicated funding source exists. Further, GSA reported that customer agencies are strategizing funding solutions and forecasting future needs, but do not have a reliable source of funding on which to ground decisions to modernize.”
GAO made four recommendations, two for OMB and two for GSA.
The director of OMB should ensure that agency IAPs prepared in cooperation with QSMOs are reviewed and approved by all respective parties as described in OMB Memorandum M-19-16.
The director of OMB should direct the civilian Chief Financial Officers Act agencies to fill the roles of senior accountable points of contact for shared services as required under OMB Memorandum M-19-16.
The GSA administrator should, in coordination with the director of OMB, appoint the Shared Services Governance Board (SSGB) co-chair and direct that individual to assume executive leadership responsibilities under OMB Memorandum M-19-16.
The GSA administrator should, in coordination with the four QSMOs, establish and implement a revised plan and time frame for collecting data outlined in its performance management framework, including cost data.
OMB didn’t comment on the report. GSA concurred with the recommendations and has plans to implement changes.