Meeting — March 23, 2024

The GSA Acquisition Policy Federal Advisory Acquisition Workforce Subcommittee convened for a public meeting at 3:00 PM on March 18, 2024, virtually via Zoom, with Nicole Darnall, Chair, and Anne Rung, Co-Chair, presiding.

In accordance with FACA, as amended, 5 U.S.C. App 2, the meeting was open to the public from 3:00 P.M. to 5:00 P.M. EST.

Meeting agenda

Committee Members Present:
Nicole Darnall, Chairperson — Arizona State University
Anne Rung, Co-Chair — Varis LLC
David Malone — AquirelQ
Troy Cribb — Partnership for Public Service

Absent: Gail Bassette, Darryl Daniels, Mark Hayden, Steven Schooner, Kristin Seaver, Clyde Thompson

Guest Speakers & Presenters:
Danielle Mouw — Office of Government-wide Policy, Procurement Analyst, GSA

GSA Staff Present:
Boris Arratia — Designated Federal Officer
Stephanie Hardison — Deputy Designated Federal Officer
David Cochennic — GAP FAC Support
Bianca McIntosh — GAP FAC Support
Chris Ales — Closed Captioner
Stephanie Pope — ASL Interpreter
Heidi Cooke — ASL Interpreter

Call to order

Stephanie Hardison, Deputy Designated Federal Officer, opened the public meeting by welcoming the group. She reminded the public that there will be time for comments and statements at the end of the meeting. Stephanie performed a roll call to confirm attendance before turning the meeting over to Chairman Nicole Darnall.

Welcome and opening remarks

Nicole expresses gratitude for the attendance and introduced the focus on embedding sustainability in the federal acquisition workforce. Danielle Mouw, a key resource, is welcomed back to discuss the credentialing process within GSA along with colleague Dr. Fiedler.

Guest speaker and questions

Q: Nicole Darnall - How are managers assessing and measuring the performance of IT acquisition credentialed employees?
A: Danielle Mouw - Managers assess performance through a structured approach that combines self-assessment by employees and feedback from supervisors. This assessment is based on a detailed competency model specifically designed for IT acquisition. Employees are asked to evaluate their own proficiency across various competencies related to IT acquisition, using a seven-point scale ranging from general awareness to expertise. Additionally, supervisors provide feedback based on their observations of employee performance in real-world scenarios. These assessments include considerations of skills, competencies, and resource utilization within the IT acquisition process.
Q: Anne Rung - When was the last competency feedback from managers and self-reporting issued, and has there been a follow-up?
A: Danielle Mouw - The last competency feedback was issued in 2019, with an update to the competency model in the current fiscal year. This update reflects changes in the landscape of IT acquisition and ensures that the competency model remains relevant and effective. A follow-up assessment is scheduled for FY25 to evaluate any changes and improvements since the update. This follow-up assessment will provide valuable insights into the effectiveness of the revised competency model and identify areas for further refinement.
Q: Anne Rung - Are people asked to assess on a 1 to 5 scale? Can you give an example of a question?
A: Dr. Fiedler - Yes, individuals are asked to assess their proficiency on a seven-point scale, ranging from a basic understanding to advanced expertise. For example, a question might ask employees to rate their ability to manage risk within the IT acquisition process. Employees would then evaluate their level of competency based on factors such as their understanding of risk management principles, their ability to identify and mitigate risks, and their experience in applying risk management strategies in procurement decisions.
Q: Anne Rung - Have managers and employees shown differences in perspectives regarding competency assessment?
A: Danielle Mouw - Yes, there have been observed differences in perspectives between managers and employees regarding competency assessment. While employees may have a more subjective view of their own abilities, managers often provide a more objective assessment based on their observations of employee performance in various contexts. These differences in perspective highlight the importance of gathering feedback from both groups to ensure a comprehensive understanding of employee competencies and performance.
Q: Nicole Darnall - How did you advertise or promote the acquisition credentialing programs internally? Did you post this information somewhere for employees to access? How did you recruit candidates for the credentialing programs?
A: Danielle Mouw - Our approach was largely grassroots, with engagement from various IT portfolios. Word-of-mouth marketing played a significant role due to the organic nature of our initiative. However, we also implemented marketing strategies, including policy implementation and leveraging existing platforms like GSA’s portal page. Columns and internal communications were utilized to inform employees about curriculum updates and new developments. Our recruitment strategy involved leveraging existing relationships and partnerships within the organization. We offered an alternative approved program, ITAC, as a substitute for DITAP, showcasing its tailored approach to skill development. We emphasized the program’s alignment with necessary skills and foundational knowledge, drawing parallels to sustainability programs. GSA’s language requiring two credentials further incentivized participation. Development assignments and word-of-mouth referrals also contributed to recruitment efforts.
Q: Anne Rung - Were all participants in the ITAC cohort internal 1102s, or did you recruit externally?
A: Danielle Mouw - Initially, the focus was on internal digital service buyers due to resource constraints. However, the program has since scaled to accommodate all IT buyers, including 1102s, 1101s, CS, and CEOs, as well as those with a FAC-C professional certification. This expansion was aligned with policy changes, as DITAP also opened its program to digital services.
Q: Anne Rung - Is the acquisition certification integrated into any position descriptions, or is it considered an additional certification?
A: Danielle Mouw - Currently, our focus is on addressing skill gaps identified through data analysis. While the certification is not yet built into position descriptions, we are exploring future strategies. This includes leveraging tools like the Continuous Learning Tool Inventory and the ITAC curriculum, as well as implementing human capital development solutions such as integrating the Individual Development Plan (IDP) for retention purposes and improving job announcements to align with the skills needed by professionals in this field. These initiatives are part of our ongoing efforts to enhance workforce development.
A: Dr. Fiedler - The credential is too new and there are too few individuals. I do anticipate it becoming a discriminator.
A: Danielle Mouw - The G-SAM GSA cases are in progress, which will require the program for warrant holders involved in IT purchases. These cases are linked to the FITARA project, tracking high-risk IT purchases. This tethering of the credential to position descriptions for those with warrants seems like a natural progression, potentially extending to fields like sustainability.
Q: Anne Rung - What other HR strategies are being considered?
A: Danielle Mouw - We are exploring various strategies, including Individual Development Plans (IDP), job announcements, workforce skills assessment, and Performance Management Reviews (PMRs). PMRs, specifically on the acquisition side, function as audits of acquisition outcomes. Our goal is to partner with PMRs to become part of remediation efforts, but ideally, we aim to prevent findings by making the credential a requirement upfront and assisting on the front end rather than just the back end.
Q: Anne Rung - Is there any consideration to incorporate the credential into individuals’ performance plans?
A: Dr. Fiedler - We have developed a tool that individuals could potentially incorporate into their Individual Development Plans (IDP). It would be ideal if participants drove their own participation in the program. We envision creating a roadmap where completing the credential and taking advantage of its opportunities could serve as a significant differentiator in their careers, motivating them to participate actively.
Q: Nicole Danielle - Was there a conversation internally about integrating sustainability into procurement practices rather than treating it as “other duties as assigned”?
A: Danielle Mouw - Absolutely. In the realm of IT, it was recognized that our acquisition outcomes needed improvement, and sustainability was seen as an aspect often overlooked or lumped into other duties. Over time, it became evident that anything with a chip or Internet connection is essentially IT-related, necessitating a broad understanding across the organization. Similarly, sustainability touches various aspects of procurement, from pre- to post-award, and should be integrated holistically. Just as with small business considerations, sustainability should be a fundamental part of procurement practices. While there are opportunities for specialization within sustainability, the goal is to ensure its integration into everyday procurement activities.
Q: Nicole Darnall - How do current performance assessment metrics relate to different types of certifications, such as IT acquisitions?
A: Danielle Mouw - Currently, metrics related to certifications are not formally incorporated into performance evaluations. However, there are organizational performance management reviews (PMRs) that assess overall performance. We are in the process of developing specific training, such as agile methodology for IT purchasing, which will be beneficial for PMR evaluations. We have SMEs assisting in developing tailored courses and templates to apply these methods throughout the procurement process, which will ultimately support the PMR team.
Q: Nicole Darnall - Can you elaborate on how Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) contribute to the training materials and the process?
A: Danielle Mouw - Our SMEs are invaluable volunteers who not only inform the process but also review and advise on the training materials. Last year, we attempted to formalize their role with memorandums of understanding but encountered some political challenges. Nevertheless, these SMEs remain deeply involved in the development and review of training materials, contributing to the competency model refresh and even participating in the program itself. Their hands-on involvement ensures that the training courses meet the needs of the workforce, and their feedback drives continuous improvement and engagement.
Q: Anne Rung - Can you share examples of language used to recruit or excite people about the program, similar to how one might promote a sustainability certification?
A: Danielle Mouw - When promoting our program, we emphasize the challenges inherent in IT acquisitions—rapid evolution, high risk, and significant financial stakes.
We convey that our program offers tailored solutions to these challenges, providing resources and expertise to navigate complex processes. For example, we highlight courses like C-SCRM that simplify intricate tasks such as selecting provisions and clauses. Our approach is not about selling a product but addressing a critical need with urgency.
Dr. Fiedler highlights the importance of systematic communication strategies and stakeholder analysis in their approach, emphasizing understanding stakeholders’ needs and pain points. While resources may be limited, their focus on meaningful and compelling messaging has paid off. By demonstrating empathy and understanding, they’ve built trust with participants, fostering effective communication.
Nicole acknowledges Danielle’s significant credibility in this area. Danielle emphasizes the importance of starting small and building from there to make learning accessible and valuable. By addressing immediate needs with small, tangible resources, they can gradually scale up to larger, more strategic initiatives, demonstrating value to both managers and leadership.
Dr. Fiedler highlights a notable achievement in getting Continuous Learning modules (CLs) to the workforce, particularly during the challenging times of the pandemic. Using innovative methods like Google Sheets transformed into a website-like tool, they automated CL delivery, demonstrating the ability to achieve significant results with minimal resources.
Q: Nicole Darnall - How do you make the course development process seamless for SMEs?
A: Danielle Mouw - Well, the process varies depending on whether it’s a custom course, a blend course, or a curation course. For custom courses, we establish a meeting schedule and collaborate iteratively with SMEs, focusing on specific templates and training requirements. We blend highly technical IT expertise with acquisition perspectives to federalize the content. For example, in our agile course, we meet weekly to discuss unique templates and session content, ensuring relevance for acquisition professionals.
A: Dr. Fiedler - Another valuable approach is forming a partnership between instructional designers and SMEs. Instructional designers understand learning strategies and develop a framework, while SMEs contribute knowledge and information within that framework. It’s a collaborative process grounded in mutual respect for subject matter expertise and training development principles.
Q: Nicole Darnall - Are you observing similar patterns of self-assessment discrepancy in your credentialing process or post-credential assessment?
A: Dr. Fiedler - Yes, we do see variations in self-assessment. Some individuals are hard on themselves, while others may overestimate their abilities. It’s like a bimodal distribution, with some supervisors noting discrepancies between self-assessment and actual performance. However, a valuable outcome is when assessors and supervisors come together to discuss these perspectives and reach a consensus.

Review of key takeaways

Nicole transitions the discussion to group discussions, inviting participants to share their
insights and observations. She provides a link to a Jam board for brainstorming,
The group came up with the following takeaways:

• 1-7 rating scale - low end (general awareness) all the way up to full competency, then expertise.
• Consider grouping key competencies into fewer and more meaningful areas vs. too many topics.
• Take a Delphi approach to creating grassroots support internally so that when the credential is available, it could move quickly. Needs top-level support.
• Start with a pilot.
• Gather input from the target population on their pain points and aspirations.
• No more than 12 competencies. Focus on professional skills, lifecycle skills, tech skills, etc. Stay away from buzzwords. Focus on risk assessment more broadly so that assets should have shelf life.
• Building trust and mutual respect is essential for effective teamwork and ensures contributions are valued.
• Make seamless for SMEs.
• Aspire to reach full competence across the majority of the competencies and hoping that some reach expert.
• Plan to require credentials for certain job descriptions - perhaps for more complex roles and/or high-money acquisitions.
• Opportunity to build this credential into individual performance plans.
• Incorporate both self-assessments and supervisor assessments. Then create a formal moment for a “meeting of the minds”.
• Sustainability, like IT, is rapidly evolving. Content needs to be continually updated in order to keep up.
• Individual development plans should be tailored to the acquisition specialist and discussed with the supervisor.
• Big challenge is to stay current with rapid changes in IT (and similarly with sustainability).
• They aid the SME in comprehending the intricacies of course development.
• They are awarding CLs for this certification.
• Need to build in assessment periods for the credential - compare to a baseline assessment, then reassess.
• Promote the program by connecting to impact on the American public.
• Building more mechanisms to embed certification into existing HR strategies - such as including competencies into individual development plans.
• Fantastic work already underway around the competency model that we should acknowledge. Baselined, streamed, etc..
• Start with KSAs and create a strong ridge between IT and acquisitions.

Nicole acknowledges the ongoing work and invites additional input on the subcommittee’s board. She transitions to discussing the primary areas of focus: job descriptions, position announcements, and sustainability credentials and training, all integral parts of the broader change management model. These recommendations will build upon the initial set relating to shifting routine practices and talent. She highlights collaboration with the policy and practices subcommittee, which is exploring vendor scorecards and climate risk reduction. Nicole plans to involve the acquisition workforce subcommittee in these discussions and pledges to develop a schedule for integrating recommendations and engaging subcommittee members in the process over the next two months before the next public meeting.

Anne expresses agreement with the outlined points and suggests refining the sub-bullets. She proposes developing a timeline considering the limited timeframe of two months and plans to discuss this further in the next administrative meeting. Anne also prompts the subcommittee to identify any additional expertise needed in the coming weeks for refining recommendations related to job descriptions, announcements, and sustainability credential training.

Public engagement

Q: Cyndi Vallina - How does the GSA competency model compare to the DITAP credential model?
A: Danielle Mouw - When we evaluated our workforce challenges and developed a model to represent those findings, we looked at several existing competency models and credential frameworks, including the federal acquisition certification contracting certification and the DITAP model. However, the DITAP model primarily focused on learning performance objectives rather than a fully tailored set of skills and competencies for the digital services workforce. In contrast, our GSA competency model is comprehensive and holistic, covering all areas of IT acquisition, from cloud procurement to traditional high-off schedules. It’s not a direct comparison between the two.

Closing remarks

Nicole and Anne expressed her gratitude for the speakers and subcommittee members before turning it over to Stephanie.

Adjournment

Stephanie Hardison adjourned the meeting at 5:00 P.M. EST.
 
I hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the foregoing minutes are accurate and complete.

Digitally signed by Nicole Darnall 9/4/2024
Nicole Darnall
Chairperson
GAP FAC Acquisition Workforce Subcommittee

Digitally signed by Anne Rung 9/4/2024
Anne Rung
Co-Chairperson
GAP FAC Acquisition Workforce Subcommittee