**INDUSTRY GOVERNMENT COUNCIL MEETING**

**SEATTLE, WASHINGTON JULY 30, 2003**

\-**[Welcoming comments]{.underline}** by Jon Kvistad, Regional
Administrator

\-**[GSA Update]{.underline}** (Gary Casteel)

-Contract Vehicle Review Board: 15 have been reviewed. The board has
made a decision which is currently being reviewed by legal. Once that is
final, Mr. Perry will broadcast the decision and a campaign will be
launched to educate internal and external stakeholders.

-   Small Business Reauthorization Bill and its impact on schedules was
    discussed

[- **Corporate Schedule**]{.underline}: Discussion about continuing
confusion and misunderstanding of this schedule. Per Sue and Gerri, once
Neal Fox makes a final decision on the future of Corporate, GSA will
concentrate on doing a better job of educating our customers. The new
schedules publications are addressing Corporate, which should help.

[- **PSX Update** (Todd):]{.underline} Exactly what role GSA will have
in PSX next year is still being determined. The option may be to have
mini-workshops strategically located throughout the US. We have begun to
do that already with events held at Wright Patterson and Norfolk through
our partnership with the GWAC centers.

[**- Industry Update** (Ed Naro):]{.underline}

There was language in SARA legislation that addressed A&E. Can't do A&E
on multiple award schedule (MAS) so language has been corrected in
subsequent versions.

NAVSEA contemplating mandating use of SEAPORT (i.e. son of NAVSEA/NAVPAC
wanna be schedule). Booze Hamilton did a study and determined they can
save big \$ (FTS fee). They really should have recommended no "fee for
use" not "no use of schedules". The issue was brought to Neil Fox's
attention. Real problem: organic agency staffs don't find schedules easy
enough. FSS needs to get the message out that they can still use
schedules and not have to pay fee.

[**Industry Update** (Mark Hoyland)]{.underline}

Mark made a presentation on the Marine Corps Systems Command CEOss
Model. 22 prime vendors. Discussed the pros and cons of the program and
the flexibility it allows.

**[Committee Reports]{.underline}**

-   E-Buy - Ed Naro:

    -   Refer to hand-out . 14 issues addressed.

    -   The original intent of the working group was to make necessary
        changes to E-Buy after the buying season. Ed was able to
        convince them not to wait and to do it now.

    -   E-Buy is ok for 803 compliance but not if you only use for
        sources sought.

    -   PD^2^ (military automated system) does not link to E-Buy. E-Buy
        seen as double entry and there's no incentive for the military
        to use it -- means more work.

    -   Vendors want to know if customer selected "all" when selecting
        sellers or if they have narrowed their market research down to a
        few.

    -   Focus groups gave us the opportunity to handle issues right
        away. For example, some customers wanted E-Buy to show where the
        vendor's home office was. This would not have been a good
        addition especially for those performing services or delivery
        products outside of this geographical area. It would have been a
        limiting factor for some.

    -   An RFQ going on under one schedule but getting a quote from a
        vendor that's on another schedule -- does that satisfy 803? Will
        probably need case law to determine.

-   Services Guide -- Todd Posey

    -   Continuity of use of schedules. 803 education. Data collection
        started but the committee needs input from the council on what
        to focus on. Too broad now. Ed suggests we ask customers for a
        set of metrics they use to measure success of their BPA's.

-   Contractor Assistance -- Dick Bell (refer to handout)

    -   Update on the Past Performance Information Retrieval System

    -   Update on 3241 Contractor Report Cards

    -   Customer Survey went out for bids. Gone one. Shut down for now.

-   Branding Campaign -- Stacey Levine

    -   Update on the "I Get It" campaign and brand recognition.

    -   Per Ed -- need to advertise the high value of quick, efficient
        solutions in our campaigns. Move beyond efficiency to "quality".

    -   Per Bruce -- the campaign is an "umbrella" and what we are
        seeing is the first step.

    -   Suggestion made that in umbrella and individual campaigns we
        include that our customers can be successful by finding quality
        in our solutions through top notch vendors.

-   White Paper: Option/Refresh/Renewal" Process Improvements
    --Katherine O'Keefe (refer to handout)

    -   Task order can extend beyond contract period. BPA cannot.

    -   Suggestion made to have a letter available on the Web in the FAQ
        section that is signed by the center director with specific
        clarification about task order usage after contract period.

**[Teaming:]{.underline}**

\- Difficult to do and figure out how to carry out. The agreement
between companies to work out the details -- reduces competition
requirements for customer.

\- Real intent was getting to the end solution. GSA didn't want to
prescribe how. Vendors agree how and customers get what they want.

\- FTS doesn't have to accept teaming proposals.

\- Per Gerri -- each team member must invoice separately. Has talked to
customers who say they have been able to pay on one invoice with team
lead. There is a provision to allow for a handling fee for lead and can
be included at the contract level -- not the task order level.

-   Credit for socioeconomic? Lots of clamoring about subs not getting
    credit.

**[Industry Partner Survey]{.underline}** -- Bruce S.

-   Conducted by CFI

-   1,000 responded. Not enough for valid statistical output.

-   74 service contractors participated.

-   Ideas being implemented to increase marketing response:

    -   Bi-annual quality partner day.

    -   Mini-Expo with regional focus.

    -   Marketing CD and on-line help.

    -   Per Ed -- go out to project managers with the survey, not the
        contracting rep.

    -   Daisy -- suggests focus groups of marketing and media
        contractors. Industry is not aware of growth, need to publicize.

# **Input for IT Center on forming a Council**

-   Model is a small group with a voice of industry, government, and
    customers (don't forget to include customers)

-   Good to have leaders (center directors) at all meetings.

-   Need to look for partnership from the companies -- not just the
    individual serving on the council

-   Very important to have a sub-committee so there is action and carry
    over from one meeting to the next.

-   Decide what vision you want for your council (i.e. small? large?
    limit? open up to all?)

-   Remember small businesses -- women owned -- HUB zone. Focus is on
    how to grow the schedules program, not just individual companies.

-   Need an industry leader -- seek out someone who will drive the
    council forward

-   Manage expectations

-   Facilitation vital

-   Get representatives from all types of services -- reps from each
    SIN.

**[Homeland Security]{.underline}** -- Tricia Pierson

-   Lots of interest from states -- but they can't buy (other than
    Cooperative Purchasing and 1122 program).

[**Actions**:]{.underline}

-   Option letter on FAQ's

-   FTS/FSS identity issue -- on agenda for next meeting

-   Input on FM's branding issue

-   Corporate Schedule -- decision on what to do

[**Fall Agenda**:]{.underline}

-   Membership

-   Homeland Security

-   FSS/FTS Identity

-   Portal

-   New schedules/new ideas/new model

Next meeting will be in November. Date to be determined.