I'm always amazed when I hear of an in-house to contract conversion resulting from an OMB A-76 Circular A-76 Commercial Activities (CA) study.

I say "amazed," because it shouldn't happen!!  Think about it!  What commercial operation really has the capability to start providing the services your organization provides, to the same level of capability, expertise, dedication, etc., with no initial training from the Government, with no contract work force "phase-in" periods, at midnight on a Sunday?

(Why midnight Sunday? The conclusion of a Government pay period. Always seems the case.)

While some of what we Government types do has a parallel commercial application, what we do as a whole does not. That's why we're Government employees, versus commercial.  What we do is different, taken as a whole.  We've been led to believe otherwise, which is used as the justification that conversion to contract can be just as supportive, if not more so, to the overall mission as an in-house operation.

Therefore, every time I learn about an in-house to contract conversion, I know the study was done wrong. (OK, there may be exceptions, but I'm speaking of the rule.)  Chances are one or more of the following was just done wrong:

• The performance work statement (PWS) didn't cover everything you and your people do.
• The PWS provided information on how to do the work (i.e. extracts from Government regulations, manuals, instructions, standard operating procedures (SOPs); personnel requirements, required education and experience; etc.) rather than precise statements of contract deliverables of measurable and quantifiable end results.  In other words, the PWS was a "how to" versus a "performance" specification. Think about it.  If the contract's specification tells how to do the job, anyone can successfully bid on it!!
• The Government's most efficient organization (MEO) wasn't based strictly on the PWS.
• The negotiated procurement technical proposal submittal requirements used to select the "best value" offeror (i.e. the bidder) were so generally stated that selected offeror's were not tasked to prove they could successfully do the work, without training, without heavily relying on hiring displaced Government employees, without a contract phase-in period (where they would not held to the contract specification requirements or payment reductions due to unsatisfactory performance, etc.), immediately upon contract start.

There could be others, but the above are the main areas for critical failure.

Why does this happen? Can't we learn from our mistakes?

Of course we could, if the same people were involved on the subsequent studies, or were involved in accomplishing all of the studies.  But that's not the case.

With the exception of a few people at each installation, the typical A-76 team member participates on only one study, his/her own.  Win or lose, it will be their only study.  So, what they learn stays with them, with little opportunity for further, and better, application.  Additionally, to really know what they're doing, the A-76 team members need to know:

• how the studied function actually works,
• what are the function's deliverables,
• the criteria for successful accomplishment of those deliverables,
• plus knowledge of specification writing, procurement, A-76 cost study rules, organizational analyses, etc.

HerbHollar.com will help you keep your Government functions subject to an A-76 study in-house.

It contains articles, examples, warnings, urgings, etc., I've written or collected over the years, information I think you can use to successfully (by "success" I mean the function stays in-house) complete your study.  I also describe some training and other services I can provide, depending on where you are in the study's progress.  As much of the information in the articles is related to other articles, hyperlinks will take you from one subject to another for a fuller explanation.

I do not provide any links to other related web sites; I'm sure you can find those, if you have not already done so.   I don't know of any other site that has the same purpose as HerbHollar.com. If you find a similar site, please let me know, and I will provide a link to that site.

I'll appreciate any contributions you may wish to make.  If you have any questions concerning the information on the site, please e-mail me at hhollar@msn.com.  I'll try to get back to you within two working days. Good luck in your A-76 study.