For fiscal year 1998, the Federal Procurement Data Center reported that federal agencies had contract obligations of about $200 billion. Acquisition refers to the process of obtaining goods, services, and space for use by the government. The acquisition process begins with a determination of a need for goods or services and includes deciding on solicitation and selection of sources; award of contracts; and contract administration, completion, and closeout. Personnel in many different occupations perform these acquisition tasks, including those who are in the acquisition profession and those who are in other professions but who become involved in the acquisition process by performing such activities as determining requirements or monitoring contractor performance. Congress, recognizing that billions of dollars are spent each year on federal procurement, the acquisition process is highly complex, and the caliber of the workforce is critical to the efficiency and effectiveness of the acquisition process, has expressed concern over the years about the expertise of the federal acquisition workforce. Every major congressional acquisition reform initiative since 1972 has included steps toward improving the acquisition workforce. Steps taken have included such measures as designating a central agency to provide leadership for acquisition workforce development, establishing minimum qualification requirements, requiring enhanced performance incentives, and giving greater visibility to funding for training the acquisition workforce. The December 1972 report of the Commission on Government Procurement recommended improvements in the efficiency and effectiveness of the procurement process through various measures, including improving the caliber of the acquisition workforce. Since then, Congress and the executive branch have taken actions designed to improve the acquisition workforce. In 1974, Congress passed legislation establishing OFPP and, over the years, assigned it responsibility to provide direction of procurement policy and leadership in the development of executive agency procurement systems, including the professional development of acquisition personnel. Through legislation, Congress directed that the Federal Acquisition Institute, under the direction of OFPP, promote governmentwide career management programs for a professional acquisition workforce. The Institute carries out this role by such means as periodically analyzing acquisition career fields, developing competencies for acquisition positions, and developing acquisition training courses. In February 1996, Congress enacted the Clinger-Cohen Act (P.L. 104-106). Section 4307 of Clinger-Cohen, entitled “Acquisition Workforce,” amended the OFPP Act and requires OFPP to, among other things, (1) establish minimum acquisition workforce qualification requirements, (2) promote uniform implementation of acquisition education and training requirements among agencies to the extent this is consistent with their missions, (3) ensure that agencies collect and maintain standardized information on the acquisition workforce related to Clinger-Cohen’s implementation, and (4) evaluate agencies’ implementation of Clinger- Cohen. In addition, Clinger-Cohen requires civilian agencies to establish, in consultation with OFPP, policies and procedures for effective management, including education and training requirements, for their acquisition workforces, and to ensure uniform implementation of policies and procedures among components to the maximum extent practicable. Clinger-Cohen further requires civilian agencies to separately identify the funding levels requested for acquisition workforce education and training in their congressional budget justification documents submitted in support of the President’s budget and provides that agencies may not obligate funds appropriated for acquisition workforce education and training under the act for any other purpose. In September 1997, after consulting with agency procurement executives, OFPP issued Policy Letter 97-01 that set forth governmentwide policies and approaches for implementing Clinger-Cohen’s acquisition workforce provisions. Among other things, OFPP directed agencies to establish core training for contract specialists (GS-1102), contracting officers, purchasing agents (GS-1105), contracting officer representatives, and contracting officer technical representatives, and at least 40 hours of continuing education or training every 2 years for contract specialists and contracting officers. There is one main occupational series that federal employees involved in acquisition work fall into—GS-1102. Contract specialists are defined as a broad category of employees whose positions are in the GS-1102 occupational series. This series includes those who perform the duties of contracting officers. Contracting officers are federal employees with the authority to bind the government legally by signing a contractual instrument. Purchasing agents, who by definition are in the GS-1105 occupational series, are federal employees who generally issue delivery orders against established contracts. Contracting officer representatives and contracting officer technical representatives are federal employees who have been designated by a contracting officer to perform certain contract administration activities, some of which relate to program or technical issues; these categories of acquisition personnel can be in a variety of OPM occupational series. In Policy Letter 97-01, OFPP delegated to the Federal Acquisition Institute the responsibility for developing a governmentwide management information system that would allow departments and agencies to collect and maintain standardized acquisition workforce information, including training data, and that would conform to standards established by OPM for its Central Personnel Data File. Although OPM has data on the total number of federal employees in the GS-1102 and GS-1105 series, it does not have data on the numbers of acquisition personnel, such as contracting officers or contracting officer technical representatives who are in other job series. Therefore, because agencies have acquisition personnel in job series other than the GS-1102 and GS-1105 series, it is not possible to determine the total number of acquisition personnel governmentwide at this time. GSA and VA, however, have estimated the number of contracting officer representatives, contracting officer technical representatives, and other acquisition personnel they employ. Most recent OPM data show that as of March 1999, there were a total of about 31,400 acquisition personnel in the GS-1102 and GS-1105 job series, of whom about 20,900 were in the Department of Defense and about 10,500 were in civilian agencies. According to GSA, as of December 1999, it had 3,146 acquisition personnel, including 1,319 in the GS-1102 and GS-1105 job series, 1,383 contracting officers who were not in the GS-1102 or GS-1105 job series, and 444 contracting officer representatives or contracting officer technical representatives, who were not contracting officers. In addition, GSA also reported that 253 of the 1,383 contracting officers were contracting officer representatives or contracting officer technical representatives. According to VA, during 1999, it had 4,357 acquisition personnel, including 1,724 contracting officers in the 1102, 1105, or other job series, such as program analysts (GS-345), general engineering (GS-801), reality specialist (GS-1170), and prosthetic representative (GS-672); 2,355 contracting officer representatives or contracting officer technical representatives who were not contracting officers; and 278 others, such as supply management specialist (GS-2003) personnel and procurement, clerical, and technical (GS-1106) personnel. In addition, VA also reported that 21 of the 1,724 contracting officers were contracting officer representatives or contracting officer technical representatives. Neither GSA nor VA has comprehensive organizationwide data showing the extent to which its acquisition workforce has received required training. Further, although both agencies have efforts under way to provide training, training records for acquisition personnel we reviewed at locations for each agency were incomplete; some acquisition personnel at each location had not met all of their training requirements; and contrary to OFPP’s policy, neither agency had established core training requirements for all categories of acquisition personnel. Both GSA and VA lacked organizationwide data on the status of training provided to the organizations’ acquisition workforce. Without such information, neither agency, nor OFPP, can be assured that Clinger-Cohen Act requirements relating to the training of the acquisition workforce are being met. GSA and VA each have both automated information systems and manual records that have some information on their acquisition workforces. For example, GSA’s automated personnel information system contains demographic information, such as an employee’s name, job series and grade, location, and education. We found that the education level on 7 of 19 (37 percent) newly hired contract specialists was erroneous and had to be corrected to reconcile with the records located in the field. Furthermore, a GSA official told us that this automated system does not contain centralized data on the extent to which GSA’s acquisition workforce meets core training and continuing education requirements. Instead, training records of this nature are maintained at the local level. With respect to VA, its Office of Acquisition and Materiel Management centrally collects and maintains training information on contracting officers with intermediate- and senior-level warrants. The information includes the employee’s name, title and grade, facility, core training completed, education level, and warrant level, but does not include core training information for contracting officers with basic-level warrants and contracting officer technical representatives. According to VA, its field offices are to maintain training information on contracting officers with basic-level warrants. VA officials told us that their headquarters’ database does not contain up-to-date information on contracting officer’s training for any warrant level because they suspended maintenance of their existing database in anticipation of the implementation of the governmentwide management information system in 1999. During our review of training records at VA’s Dallas medical center, we found that 10 out of 11 intermediate- and senior-level contracting officers’ headquarters database files were incomplete. In addition, each agency also maintains hard copy personnel files for its employees that, according to each agency, are supposed to contain a variety of data, including warrant level and training received. However, about one-third of the files we reviewed at the two agencies’ field locations we visited were incomplete. Files were incomplete for 25 of the 70 (36 percent) files we reviewed at GSA’s Greater Southwest 8 of the 25 (32 percent) files we reviewed at VA’s Dallas medical center. In these instances, files frequently lacked documentation that contracting officers met core training and continuing education requirements. We had to request additional information from the individual contracting officers or agency officials regarding warrants, core training, or continuing education for these 33 individuals. The contracting officers and agency officials provided us with the additional information.