While pending budgetary and political outcomes are still many months from resolution, carefully planned and justified digital transformation offers a safe harbor for investment decisions being made today. By finding opportunities to improve government efficiency and productivity while reducing costs, agencies can both gain needed advancements and mitigate risks from current unknowns. The key is readiness to make constructive moves quickly to be well-positioned for momentum and success on Oct. 1.

Starting off strong in FY25

Agency IT leaders may be giving some serious thought as to what to do in the first 100 days of the new budget year. One area ripe with potential is removing systems duplication across agencies with adjacent purposes. Consider one real example: a department within Agency A identifies and certifies individual claimants as legitimate victims of a particular type of crime. Department personnel had traditionally used spreadsheets to collect, track and analyze claimant data to decision benefits entitlement. Automating data collection and tracking allowed on-demand access for the entire program team, but also enabled a dozen other Agency A components to more easily coordinate with Agency B, an integral part of the justice system. Agency A’s productivity skyrocketed, with twice as many victims served in the year after implementation vs. the year before, without increasing budget or staffing; time to victim certification was reduced by half. Their IT investment also eliminated the need for a duplicate system at Agency B, which was now willing to accept Agency A’s certification decision – a win-win for everyone.

Digital transformation can also make a significant improvement in mission outcomes where poor or inconsistent system quality is leading to customer dissatisfaction. The biggest impacts will be found when new technology enables customer self-service, reducing time to benefit and concurrently reducing government employees’ burden of performing lower-value work like filling in forms. Effective planning will also help replace cumbersome, expensive aging technologies to make room for more cost-effective options and processes. Routine, manually-intensive activities could be made significantly better and faster using advanced technologies like artificial intelligence. The resulting talent enablement will empower staff to prioritize activities that are more important, and also likely more fulfilling, supporting workforce retention.

An additional option is to focus on known appropriations priorities (such as infrastructure, the Chips Act or supply chain sustainability, in the recent past). Understanding where the government will be willing to spend can help direct the alignment of an IT organization’s own investment strategy.

Maximizing year-end ‘bonus’ dollars

Agencies that may find themselves with the luxury of obligated but unused FY24 funds can apply that money toward sound end-of-year digital modernization investments that will deliver a big impact. Again, look for where automation can address system duplication or independently recognized poor quality or poor customer satisfaction. This is also a good opportunity to modernize a system that has been either unreliable, compromised, or otherwise proven to have significant shortfalls.

The key is to pursue technology opportunities that will produce a measurable business return. That requires innovative thinking for IT-minded people who often consider new technology only as a means to reducing operations and maintenance (O&M) costs – i.e., moving to the cloud for cheaper data storage or using low code software to reduce development costs. While any savings is helpful, these kinds of reductions have minimal impact, since IT O&M typically represents only a small part of an organization’s total budget.

Instead, approaching IT investment as a means to benefit business productivity (i.e., repurposing labor to higher-value needs or increasing customer transaction capacity with the same number of staff) can produce dramatically higher returns. And, because budgeted O&M expenses will have already been met, any extra end-of-year funds can be applied toward development, modernization and enhancement (DM&E) initiatives that might otherwise not get done, amplifying the payback of this ‘bonus’ money.

If IT leaders need some guidance on this journey, the discipline of Technology Business Management offers a valuable framework and tools that provide a consistent way to measure technology investments so that they can be translated to business value.

Solving a perennial problem

While government fiscal cycles will always impose some annual uncertainty, one thing is certain – the ongoing requirement for digital transformation is sure to continue as long as technology evolves. By focusing investments on business outcomes, agency IT leaders can not only appropriately justify their budgets but also advance their agencies’ mission fulfillment – no matter which direction the political winds may blow.

Jeff Myers is Senior Director of Government Contracts at REI Systems.

In a sample of the more than 340 operations and maintenance contracts awarded by the Public Buildings Service, the General Services Administration’s inspector general found nearly 70% of open work orders have not been filled, and of those that were, 43% took longer than they should have.

This risks federal buildings becoming “more vulnerable to excessive wear and tear,” leading to “higher repair and replacement costs” and potentially unsafe working conditions, according to the audit, which investigated GSA-owned buildings in Georgia, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, Oregon and Texas.

At the Jacob Javits building in New York, for example, 44% of the schedule preventative maintenance had not been done on time. That building primarily houses the Department of Homeland Security, Social Security Administration, FBI and Court of International Trade.

The federal government’s real estate situation has been thrust in the spotlight post pandemic. Higher rates of employees teleworking have made some office space obsolete, while other buildings have seen the shift as an opportunity to remodel or rethink space to be more flexible to accommodate the hybrid nature of work.

In a recent hearing before lawmakers, Jason Miller, a top official from the Office of Management and Budget, said agencies are about 80% compliant with orders to have their workforces onsite half of the time. And about 50% of all workers is not eligible to telework in the first place, he said. However, “extra” space that is either underutilized or outdated has become a complicated topic, as reducing, repurposing and repopulating federal offices all cost money and resources, which the audit shows are thin even just for existing work.

Officials interviewed in the report said at five of six sampled sites, there was not enough contract staff to meet the level of work, especially for larger buildings. There appears to be a discrepancy between personnel needs because staff at the actual place where maintenance will be done don’t get to weigh in on whether a contractor’s proposed staff levels is sufficient before an award is made.

Frequent turnover and lack of skills also contribute to hired staff being ill-equipped to meet the work, the report found.

In other instances of lapsed repairs or foregone maintenance, contractors and federal officials overseeing the work have different understandings of what a contract requires, and the Public Building Service, an office within GSA, has not enforced its own contract terms.

“One contractor did not inspect any completed work orders even though its contract required quality control inspections to be submitted monthly,” according to the audit.

Inspection checks were sometimes marked as a “pass” even without the work having been done, and sometimes they didn’t occur at all, without any repercussions.

In another example cited in the report, the Edith Green-Wendell Wyatt building in Oregon had a backup water tank for fire sprinklers that had not been cleaned, as required, “in a long time.” Yet the contractor marked the inspection as “complete,” even though a subsequent visit revealed murky, green water so opaque a subcontractor couldn’t see through it when it sent a submersible down to look for cracks.

In its response to the audit, PBS said it would agree to enforce technical evaluations of bids pre-award and would issue clarifying guidance to ensure the expectations of a contract are adhered to.

NOTE: Is your office space well maintained? Do you have safety or hazard concerns at your federal building? Let us know so we can look into it by sending us a tip to tips@federaltimes.com

Anonymous messages welcome.

A joint study by the National Capital Planning Commission and the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments broke down how limited telework would require the government to hold onto its expiring leases, thereby creating demand for housing in a region with high post-pandemic rent and home prices.

“With regular commuting becoming a necessity again, proximity to federal workplaces would likely become a prime consideration,” according to the findings. “Since the beginning of the pandemic, average rent in the D.C. region rose by 12% to $2,000, while average home prices have grown by 22% to $533,000, a trend seen throughout the nation.”

For marginalized communities, those increases are more dramatic; the report indicates there’s a $156,000 gap in median home value between Black and white residents.

Sustained high prices and limited inventory may pose an issue for workers who moved out from cities to lower cost areas during the pandemic and are being called back.

“Property values in areas proximate to federal offices might experience an uptick due to sustained competition over a limited amount of housing,” the report added, also acknowledging that retail and service sectors that depend on the business of federal employees could see profound economic implications under a limited telework policy.

Minimum vs. Maximum telework

At this point, the federal government has for the most part settled into a hybrid work schedule with agencies determining for themselves what cadence works best. Some agencies continue to permit remote work more than others, while the White House, local D.C. leadership and conservative lawmakers have sought to more aggressively call workers back. A change in administration prompted by the general election in November could see telework further eroded at the hands of a Republican administration. Even so, President Joe Biden’s chief of staff has prodded agency leaders over their reentry plans.

If that trend continues, minimum telework may cause the federal government to maintain its federal real estate as it did prior to the pandemic, the report said. That’s as the General Services Administration is trying to consolidate space it no longer needs or that cannot be affordably renovated in order to save costs and devote resources to critical repair projects.

One possible solution would be to rely less on leased space and more on owning facilities, which long term would get rid of recurring costs associated with leasing, the report said.

Still, a minimum-telework scenario is just one of several that could play out.

If maximum telework is safeguarded instead of minimized, some agencies’ office utilization may fall as low as 9%, according to the report’s estimates.

Some agencies may see a larger in-person presence if they deal with national security information or operate labs, and that means space use would vary around the DMV. For example, Alexandria, Virginia, has a lower concentration of these types of federal offices; therefore, the area could see a much more dramatic decrease in office space compared to Arlington, which houses the Pentagon, for example.

And any contractions of space could lead to a dispersion of workers to other cities and rural areas who bring retail business and transit infrastructure with them, the report said. On the flip side, existing public transit in metro areas would see dramatically decreased weekday ridership under heightened telework.

While it’s still unclear how telework decisions will be finalized, nearly a third of all federally leased space in D.C. is expiring within five years. For some areas, including Prince Georges County, Maryland, and the City of Alexandria, Virginia, those rates are 46% and 94% respectively.

The FedRooms lodging program is the only government-wide hotel program available to all federal and military travelers on official business. It sets competitive rates for stays at more than 10,000 properties around the world, and the ability to book leisure travel is an added benefit. More than 400,000 rooms were booked using the site last year, according to the General Services Administration.

This month, the program announced on Facebook that it was discontinuing the FedRooms website after Sept. 30, prompting concerns from feds that this meant an end to the program altogether. A GSA spokesperson clarified that’s not the case.

“The FedRooms program overall is not going away, but in order to be compliant with policy and to minimize future unnecessary costs, GSA will no longer support FedRooms.com as a contractor-provided website as of Sept. 30, 2024 (the date the contract is set to expire),” the official said in a statement.

Any existing reservations made for beyond Sept. 30 will still be honored, the spokesperson said. No new bookings after that will be permitted. GSA said that a new temporary-duty lodging contract is targeted for award this spring.

In the meantime, booking for official travel will remain available via other tools, such as E2 Solutions, ConcurGov, the Defense Travel System and by calling an agency’s travel management company, the spokesperson said.

For employees who still want to find a competitive rate for leisure travel, they can reach out to hotels directly to inquire about a “government” rate. Any deals, however, are subject to hotels’ discretion.

FedRooms is a popular program among feds. From 2019 to 2023, nightly stays increased almost 70%. Employees appreciate the program for its flexible cancellation policies, zero deposits, free parking and waived fees. It also ensures prices are at or below approved per-diem rates.

The change is motivated by compliance requirements in pre-existing policy that govern the use of official websites. The Office of Management and Budget within the White House directs agencies to use only “.gov” websites as a way to convey trustworthy, verified information to the public. In addition, the Federal Travel Regulation requires temporary duty travel to be made only with approved booking tools; Fedrooms.com is not one of them.

The existing contractor, CW Government Travel, was re-awarded the $47 million contract for FedRooms in 2019. That expires on Sept. 30, coinciding with the discontinuation of the website, which is managed by the vendor, not GSA. A request-for-proposal for fa five-year contract was submitted in January.

A spokesperson for the company directed Federal Times’ inquiries to GSA.

Correction: This article previously misstated how many stays were booked with FedRooms. In 2023, there were 400,000 room nights booked via fedrooms.com. That’s out of 3.8 million total FedRoom reservations approved through other booking tools, like ETS2, DTS, and agency TMCs.

A bold vision requires bold action, and the most effective way for the U.S. government to take the lead in realizing the change it and its partners seek in the digital world is to get its own house in order. To do so, it must prioritize ensuring that its marketplace reflects the values it promotes by addressing the risks that persist from its IT monoculture.

The federal government is the largest consumer of goods and services in the world, spending roughly $600 billion each year—including more than $100 billion on IT and cyber investments. A large majority of these investments are directed toward Microsoft. Relying so heavily on a single IT provider not only increases the target profile of that provider, but also limits the ability of the government to defend itself against future cyberattacks. As Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-Mo.,recently stated, “only meaningfully employing one vendor” creates a single point of failure that adversaries can exploit.”

These concerns have been echoed across government agencies, including the U.S. Departments of Veterans Affairs and Defense. Current and former officials tied the VA’s move to go “all-in” on a single vendor to the accidental disclosure of 1,500 U.S. veterans’ personal data. Similarly, former DoD senior officials questioned the department’s decision to replace its long-running cybersecurity program with off-the-shelf tools from the same vendor providing the DoD’s software and cloud services, calling the move an “unacceptable level of risk” for the department.

In December, with the passage of the 2024 National Defense Authorization Act came lawmakers’ agreement to a key insert to the act by Sen. Schmitt (section 1553) compelling the Department of Defense (DoD) to assess the cybersecurity capabilities of the technologies it uses so as to ensure competition and interoperability—the concern being that both competition and interoperability are hindered by the DoD’s overreliance on legacy vendors. Cybersecurity experts know that an impartial analysis will likely find the DoD’s overreliance on a single vendor is severely limiting competition and interoperability, and is as a result a threat to U.S. national security.

The DoD represents the largest portion of the U.S. government marketplace, but the need to diversify IT and cybersecurity vendors extends across the government and aligns with the Biden Administration’s National Cybersecurity Strategy. The strategy is rooted in two central themes: rebalancing the responsibility to defend cyberspace and realigning incentives to favor long-term investments. As part of this, the U.S. government and major technology providers are called on to protect data, assure the reliability of critical systems, and make cyberspace more resilient and defensible over the long term.

The best place to start is in its own marketplace—where the U.S. government has the most control. For the government to best protect its systems and invest in a secure digital ecosystem, it must foster greater competition and diversify the vendors it relies on to provide and secure its digital ecosystem. Doing so would drive the values the administration seeks to realize in the broader digital world and enhance our national security posture. Additionally, such a move in the largest marketplace in the world would be a major incentive to drive change and almost certainly reduce the need for extensive regulation to enforce an open, free, interoperable market.

Until the U.S. government’s marketplace exemplifies its vision for the broader digital world, it can’t expect to lead others in realizing such a vision—at home or abroad. The U.S. government should prioritize leading by example and ensure its IT marketplace fosters competition, privacy, and security, and ultimately by selecting a more diverse set of cybersecurity and IT vendors. In this way, the U.S. government will lead by example, not exception, in bringing about the global internet and technology ecosystem that it envisions at home and abroad.

Cory Simpson is the founder and CEO of Gray Space Strategies, Inc., a professional services and strategic advisory firm based in Washington, D.C., and serves as CEO of the Institute for Critical Infrastructure and as a Senior Advisor to the Cyberspace Solarium Commission.

Our defense programs fortify national security, drive technological innovation and stimulate local economies. Through these programs, we have cultivated a network of highly skilled workers, engineers and support staff who contribute to creating cutting-edge defense equipment that is second to none. These dedicated men and women exemplify the spirit of American manufacturing, producing technology that keeps our military personnel safe and our nation secure.

We recently released a report with a path forward toward a more resilient aerospace and defense industry. One of the central recommendations was to substantially reinforce “Buy American” requirements to ensure that American tax dollars are not only reinvested in the American economy but also prioritize union workers in the federal procurement process.

We recently achieved a significant milestone in our pursuit of these values by urging members of Congress to support initiatives aimed at strengthening domestic content requirements for major defense programs. This rallying call, led by Rep. Donald Norcross, D-N.J., has garnered widespread bipartisan support.

The core of our nation’s defense and economic vitality hinges on our Buy American policy, which embodies our deepest values.

For decades, the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, or IAM, has tirelessly worked to reinforce domestic content requirements, ensuring that American manufacturing assumes a central role in confronting our nation’s challenges. This endeavor is not just about bolstering the domestic defense-industrial base; it’s about creating and sustaining hundreds of thousands of high-quality manufacturing jobs within the United States.

By prioritizing American-made products, we invest in the livelihoods of American workers, thus empowering families and communities across our great nation.

But our commitment extends even further. Our brave men and women in uniform, who dedicate their lives to protect our freedoms, deserve nothing less than the best tools available. By enhancing domestic content requirements, we guarantee that our armed forces have consistent access to the highest quality equipment, enabling them to safely and effectively accomplish their missions. We owe it to our military personnel to equip them with the best the United States offers.

As a U.S. Navy veteran and former aircraft assembler at Lockheed Martin’s facility in Fort Worth, Texas, I know firsthand the importance of defense manufacturing on our nation’s security.

The support for Buy American is not confined to the IAM; it resonates throughout the labor movement. The American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations, or AFL-CIO — the largest federation of unions in the United States — stands shoulder to shoulder with us in advocating these policies. It emphasizes Buy American policies, reflecting our shared values and ensuring that government procurement aligns with U.S. labor, environmental, and health and safety standards. By reinvesting taxpayer dollars in domestic products, we forge jobs that support families and communities in cleaner, safer American factories.

The Union Veterans Council has also wholeheartedly endorsed Buy American, underscoring the pivotal role that domestic manufacturing plays in providing our troops with the highest-quality defense products. Our veterans, who understand the significance of American-made equipment in safeguarding our national security, speak from a place of profound experience.

The united endorsements of the IAM, AFL-CIO and the Union Veterans Council underscore the urgency of strengthening domestic manufacturing and our shared commitment to fortify our nation and workforce.

In the face of recent global challenges, we must bolster our domestic capabilities and safeguard our national interests. By unwaveringly supporting Buy American policies, we invest in the future of our nation, enhancing our economy, defense and workforce. This is the path to a stronger, more secure America, and it is one that we must wholeheartedly embrace.

Robert Martinez Jr. is the international president of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers. He previously served in the U.S. Navy and worked as an aircraft assembler for Lockheed Martin.

EIS is a contracting vehicle designed to enable federal agencies to procure mission-critical telecommunications, infrastructure and technology services. It’s the path to modernizing the government’s IT infrastructure, implementing advanced cybersecurity and improving service to the public.

Of course, what was viewed as modern in 2017 seems outdated and insufficient by 2023 standards. That’s because the rate of technological change is swift. And not only do technologies change, but expectations change too. Users and constituents want seamless experiences, without excuses.

Prior to EIS, agency IT teams would design a dedicated network, outline its specs in a statement of work and release it for competitive bids, seeking the lowest cost technically acceptable. This approach shifted with EIS and the government’s desire to seek “best value” rather than lowest cost.

Today, when the Hughes team works with government agencies, we urge them to articulate their core objectives, needs and performance requirements in a procurement-driven Statement of Objectives. This approach enables them to take advantage of emerging technologies and capabilities, and not get locked into one specific technology, solution or vendor. When executed correctly, that is the brilliance of EIS. Agencies have a unique opportunity to explore and deploy a diverse range of networking technologies to meet the evolving needs of their users and branch locations.

Expanding Connectivity Options

One innovative technology gaining momentum — and available to government agencies eligible for EIS and other contract vehicles — is Low Earth Orbit satellite connectivity, which expands the number of broadband transport options and capacity available to agencies. LEO satellites orbit close to the Earth, enabling them to deliver a unique combination of low latency connectivity in even the most remote areas. They can support latency-intensive applications like videoconferencing, accessing a VPN or any activity that requires a snappy internet connection.

The Power of Hybrid Networks

While the emergence of LEO is garnering significant attention, other transport options like Geostationary satellites are still unmatched in their ability to deliver large amounts of affordable broadband capacity. While each transport offers varying coverage areas, speeds and performance levels, they no longer need to be viewed in isolation. Instead, agencies can now look at their needs and networking environments holistically.

Multi-transport or hybrid networking involves the integration of several different broadband technologies, including wired, wireless, satellite and more. This diversity allows agencies to leverage the strengths of each technology to address specific requirements. One of its benefits is built-in redundancy. If one network path experiences a failure or disruption, traffic can seamlessly switch to an alternate path, ensuring continuous connectivity and minimal downtime.

Hybrid networks also optimize bandwidth utilization by intelligently distributing traffic across available paths, minimizing congestion and ensuring the efficient use of resources. In addition to connecting remote workers and branches, hybrid networks featuring LEO services can support:

Multi-state emergency networks — Federal agencies with regional incident response centers that coordinate local, state and national teams and relief organizations during disasters can establish effective communications systems faster than ever before to support on-the-ground responders when terrestrial networks are destroyed or overwhelmed by demand. By creating a coverage area—that can span a few square miles to multiple counties to several states—an IRC can establish reliable communications with voice connectivity, internet access and video services. Capabilities can power two-way mobile communications for rescue personnel; serve pop-up medical care operations; provide hotspot connectivity for residents; and help local businesses resume operations.

Critical infrastructure monitoring — Agencies involved in border security, law enforcement and critical infrastructure protection can utilize hybrid networks to connect surveillance and monitoring systems, cameras, sensors and field facilities to safeguard energy grids, water supply and transportation systems.

National and international connectivity — Agencies focused on diplomacy, foreign relations and international cooperation can utilize hybrid networks to connect offices and embassies, at home and abroad. Especially in less developed nations where infrastructure may be lacking or non-existent, LEO connectivity can be mission critical.

Hybrid solutions coupled with EIS provide a flexible way to meet varied and complex government needs. As agencies continue to transition to EIS and modernize their networks, engaging with a Managed Services Provider can be beneficial. An MSP can help to reduce risk by bringing entire teams of experts to the task. Partnering with the right MSP––one that possesses the technologies and engineering prowess to deploy hybrid networks––can enable agencies to navigate the complexities of LEO transport integration and harness its full potential.

Broadband demands at government agencies have changed significantly since the EIS contracting vehicle emerged years ago. Meeting the growing demand for connectivity at even the most remote branch locations will take every kind of transport—including LEO, GEO and wireless transports. By diversifying their connectivity ecosystem, government agencies can ultimately improve constituent services while building greater resiliency into their networks.

James Clevenger is director of government sales and Hughes Network Systems, a Germantown, Maryland-based provider of satellite and network services to businesses and government.

In my recent testimony before the U. S. Senate, representing CrowdAI—a small business I led that was recently acquired by Saab— I called attention to these complexities while advocating for the federal government to modernize its acquisition rules and processes, lest they be left behind by both our Allies and adversaries.

While it won’t be easy, change is critical. Here are five ways for government to build effective roadmaps for successful AI procurement:

1. Contextualize data

Despite what some businesses tout, commercial AI does not have plug-and-play solutions for governmental projects. In reality, there is only nascent constructs — building blocks that are adaptable (and potentially incredibly effective) but their efficacy hinges on precise data for model conditioning. Without the correct data, AI models cannot produce the desired outcome.

While governments have, and should, protect their data, sources, and methods, it is impossible to build effective AI technologies without access.

To make AI and automation achievable, governments must begin curating specialized, high-quality datasets that are not only compliant with security and privacy regulations, but conform to common standards for machine learning. This task is complex, especially considering international data-sharing agreements and the complications that arise from global partnerships. However, ignoring this step will lead to inefficiencies that will frustrate adoption of AI-powered solutions.

2. Perpetually improve

The contracting models of the past are fundamentally ill-equipped to cope with the dynamic nature of AI technology. Just like your smartphone needs regular updates to improve features, fix bugs, and prevent vulnerabilities, AI models are similarly iterative technologies that rely on dynamic, ongoing adjustments.

For instance, our collaborative projects with the California Air National Guard to map wildfires in real-time revealed the necessity for continuous model adaptation as fires moved from forested to urban areas.

While we know what needs to happen for long-term success, most government contracts fail to include ongoing updates and maintenance required for these projects.

Governmental contracts must go beyond making a simple, one-time purchase and entrench the iterative nature of AI into their frameworks. A contract must be a reflection of the technology it is purchasing: adaptive, agile, and perpetually improving.

3. Rigorously evaluate

The democratization of AI through open-source models presents a dual-edged sword. While it expands access, it also complicates vetting, particularly for government agencies that may not have the in-house technical acumen to validate a model’s suitability for intricate missions.

Compounded with contracts that fail to facilitate iterative development, the result is significant risk exposure to governments from unqualified contractors and failed projects at taxpayer’s expense.

To mitigate this risk, governments need to invest in building or acquiring evaluation expertise. Procurement protocols should encompass not just initial benchmarks, but periodic reviews that scrutinize alignment with evolving mission objectives, data privacy and security norms, and social-ethical constraints.

4. Track and prioritize

Smaller businesses, with their nimble structures and innovative dynamism, often find themselves stymied when scaling their solutions within the confines of governmental procurement. While small businesses may be agile, they can also wither under lengthy government procurement timelines without support.

Contractual milestones within research and development contracts for transition to operations would help innovators scale up and provide lasting value to government organizations. Some programs like the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) have initiated steps in this direction. And SBIR’s sole-source award policy enables small businesses to compete with large prime contractors. However, it is not enough.

SBIR faces growing challenges. Over the last few years, we’ve observed the quantity of SBIR awardees balloon, the size of awards shrink, and the amount of transitioned projects slip.

To support SBIR program success and the businesses that pursue these awards, governmental offices should track and prioritize the quantity of projects transitioned to programs of record, not simply measure the quantity contracts or funds awarded. What’s more, departments and agency that participate in SBIR must update transition mechanisms, the contracts and funding, that will account for a capability needing significant ongoing improvement such as AI.

5. Support international frameworks

Over the past 75 years or so, we have come simply to accept that policy lags technology. The pace of change is too fast, we say, for regulations to be contemplated, let alone promulgated. However, the gap has become too wide and too consequential to ignore. The evolving tapestry of international entanglements, underscored by technological dependencies and data alliances, has rendered traditional procurement frameworks inadequate to the point of being dangerous.

To move forward, we need more than a national AI strategy. We also need to support international collaborative frameworks that consider the multi-faceted impact of AI, from cooperative security to ethics, if we want to create and sustain successful frameworks for advanced technologies.

Conclusion

Governmental agencies need to drastically evolve their procurement methods to meet the unique challenges posed by AI.

For governments to transition to the effective procurement and use of AI technologies, which carry the potential for extraordinary benefits, we must look at the bigger picture. Yes, we need contract adaptations. But governments also need a more profound systemic overhaul that aligns technological advancements with strategic foresight, legal rigor, and ethical considerations.

By doing so, we can transition from the present state of disjointed engagements to a future where AI serves as a robust, reliable partner in achieving the collective aims of society.

Devaki Raj was the CEO and Co-Founder of CrowdAI. On September 7, 2023, Devaki joined Saab, Inc.’s newly established strategy office as the Chief Digital and AI Officer. On September 14, Devaki testified before the U.S. Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee on AI acquisition and procurement.

GSA put out a request-for-information on the proposed survey to gather feedback with responses due Nov. 10.

It’s an interesting, though familiar, idea, said Joel Krooswyk, federal chief technology officer at GitLab Inc.

“It’s the first time I’ve seen something that looks like a long running industry standard,” he said in an interview. “And I wonder if that’s on purpose for people who have been in product manufacturing or product definition for a long time who are used to getting these kind of questions.”

The mix of 200 yes-or-no and short-answer questions are designed to help government assess details on hardware design, data protection and other cybersecurity supply chain risk management features. While responses to the RFI may change what the final questionnaire looks like, it’s the latest potential tool in the government’s arsenal to improve security in the federal industrial base.

However, there are some practical concerns with the way it’s looking to harness this input, said Chris Hughes, chief security advisor at Endor Labs and a fellow at CISA.

For one, it risks becoming another form to fill out in an “ecosystem that already faces cumbersome compliance requirements,” Hughes said.

“Now someone at GSA and/or other agencies will have to ingest and make sense of all these [answers] that are going to get returned to them,” he added.

But Krooswyk said vendors may feel inclined to respond to show they are proactive compared to their competitors.

In the RFI, GSA said one additional objective is to potentially reduce industry burden from responding to several government questionnaires.

Since the questionnaire would be voluntary, there’s also a question of whether respondents will self-select among those who are willing, and able, to be transparent on a host of topics.

“Obviously, when there’s contracts and revenue on the line, companies may give favorable answers, or they may not be as forthcoming as they would be if a third party was evaluating them, for example,” said Hughes. “So I think it’s not beneficial in that regard, because it’s going to be self-reported.”

Though with heightened attention to the National Cyber Security Strategy, shifting software liabilities and IT best practices, suppliers looking to do business with government are used to being tested on their claims, Krooswyk said.

“They’re more concerned about that now,” he said. “So I think people will represent themselves.”

And the questionnaire could fill an information gap on aspects of the supply chain that haven’t been as deeply understood, Krooswyk said.

Experts also pointed out that the binary questions could yield some subjective answers, especially if a vendor’s response is somewhere between “yes” or “no.”

One proposed question asks whether vendors follow operational standards or frameworks for IT and cybersecurity. There are at least a handful of NIST and other frameworks that could be acceptable answers, so one vendor may satisfy that by adhering to just one, while another may follow them all.

“Which ones are important? How do I know? … Are they the same things that are important to GSA? And what does the alignment look like?” Krooswyk said, suggesting that some specificity could help.

Hughes vulnerability scans or machine-readable artifacts may be generally more effective ways of showing, rather than telling, a product’s capability.

“Self-attestation is a great start because it’s easy, it’s low friction, they can give us the information voluntarily,” said Hughes. “But maybe it’s not as forthcoming or truthful or rigorous as a third-party attestation. But also [that’s] very cumbersome, complex, time consuming and expensive. So it’s a delicate balance.”

As for what’s missing, Hughes said he’d like to see more on open source software, given many vendors may integrate it into their products and should have rigorous governance of them in place.

Krooswyk said where the questionnaire asks about hardware bill of materials, so too should it incorporate that for software to get a system-level vantage point.

The Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency and Immigration & Customs Enforcement will be relocating to DHS’ St. Elizabeths campus, where it will be joined by a new 1,500-space parking garage, to serve as a central office for a majority of agency employees.

“As public servants, we have a responsibility to the public to make smart, careful use of their money,” said U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas at an event Thursday. “Bringing the DHS, CISA and ICE together under one roof at St. Elizabeth’s will increase departmental mission cohesion and streamline inter- and intra-component collaboration, which helps make a stronger and better positioned to mitigate the new and evolving threats America faces.”

St. Elizabeths’ west campus, situated in southeast D.C. on a pastoral hill overlooking the Anacostia River, has been a development project for GSA for some time, with goals to maximize its 176 acres into a high-security federal campus that will serve as the management and operations hub for DHS.

The construction, which is set to break ground next year, will yield additional office space for 6,500 personnel, more than doubling the number of employees who currently work there, and further consolidate DHS from 40 locations to six, eliminating the equivalent of 21 football fields of space in the National Capital Region.

This comes at a time when many federal agencies are being urged by the White House to bring employees back to offices, some of which have sat at 25% capacity or less.

“We’ve worked very closely with the Department of Homeland Security about their mission needs here and that includes the people that they need on site here,” U.S. General Services Administration Administrator Robin Carnahan told reporters at the event.

For some years, the White House has been urging federal agencies to better utilize existing space through consolidation and higher occupancy rates, to which the Biden administration added goals for decarbonization of federal buildings and net-zero emissions by 2045.

“With this project, we’re modeling a comprehensive approach to sustainability in the federal footprint — using low-embodied carbon materials, new technologies, and a strong partnership on grid decarbonization with the local utility company,” said Carnahan.

GSA signed a memorandum on Tuesday with utility provider company, Pepco, to partner on electrical infrastructure and electric vehicle charging. Pepco provides energy services to approximately 894,000 customers in the D.C. and Maryland.