The Administrator of OFPP is also required to ensure that agencies  collect and maintain standardized information on the acquisition  workforce. Its efforts include strengthening workforce  planning requirements and setting standards for core acquisition training  by establishing certification requirements. FAI efforts include: improving the collection and  management of training information, including cost data and course  evaluations; streamlining the communication of acquisition training  guidance; and coordinating efforts to maximize acquisition workforce  training investments government-wide. OFPP Promotes Government-wide Practices for Acquisition Workforce Training and Development

The Federal Acquisition Certification requirements were issued in 2005 for contracting  professionals and 2007 for Contracting Officer’s Representatives and Program/Project  Managers. The other government entities may provide  training to an agency without seeking additional reimbursement, as is the  case with FAI, DAU, and some federal agencies; however, others, such  as the VA, charge a fee to attend their training to recoup their costs.15 Of  the remaining 6 agencies, 5 reported that they hold agency-sponsored  courses to provide the majority, if not all, of their acquisition workforce  training, and one agency did not report. In response to our  questionnaire, most agencies—17 of 23—reported that they are able to  find sufficient courses to do this. Agencies Face Challenges with Having Adequate Training Resources, Identifying the Acquisition Workforce, and Staff Having Time to Attend Training

The top challenges reported by agencies in obtaining training for their  acquisition workforces were having sufficient resources—both staffing to  manage the training program and budgetary resources—to provide  training. Specifically, 20 agencies reported that obtaining adequate  funding is a challenge, and 19 reported that obtaining sufficient staff to  manage the acquisition workforce training is a challenge. Lack of Comparable Cost Data and Limited Insights On Benefits of Training Hinder Efforts to Maximize Resources Government-wide

Agencies collect some training cost data and limited information about the  benefits of their acquisition workforce training. In addition, some agencies do not have metrics to  assess the effectiveness of their training. data eventually provided by the agencies included different cost  components, which did not lend themselves to comparative analysis. Due to the limited response on cost data, FAI  initiated a subsequent data call. FAI officials noted that collecting cost data from agencies is  an evolving process and that having comparable training cost data is  important to help FAI in its efforts to maximize the use of acquisition  workforce training dollars government-wide. OFPP, FAI, and the agencies  need basic information on how much agencies are spending to train the  acquisition workforce. Recommendations for Executive Action

To help ensure that agencies collect and report comparable cost data and  perform a minimal assessment of the benefits of their acquisition training  investments to aid in the coordination and evaluation of the use of  resources government-wide, we recommend the Director of the Office of  Management and Budget direct the Administrator of the Office of Federal  Procurement Policy, in consultation with the Director of the Federal  Acquisition Institute, to take the following two actions: provide further guidance, including definitions, on the types of costs  that agencies should include in their Acquisition Human Capital Plan  submission to help determine total training investment; and  require all agencies, at a minimum, to collect and analyze participant  evaluations of all acquisition workforce training as a first step to help  assess the effectiveness of their training investment. Specifically, this report addresses the (1) role of the  Office of Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP) and the Federal Acquisition  Institute (FAI) in promoting Federal Acquisition Certification (FAC)  standards and assisting agencies in meeting acquisition workforce  training requirements; (2) approaches agencies use to provide training to  their acquisition workforces; and (3) the extent to which agencies track  information on the costs and benefits of their acquisition training. To gather illustrative examples and more detailed explanations regarding  training approaches and data tracked related to costs and benefits, we  selected four agencies—the Departments of Education (Education),  Homeland Security (DHS), the Treasury (Treasury), and Veterans Affairs  (VA)—for further review. DHS, Treasury, and VA are agencies that  operate dedicated acquisition workforce training facilities—permanent  centers with dedicated resources that provide training specifically for the  agency’s acquisition workforce. Of the eight leading practices GAO identified, we focused on the four  practices dealing primarily with determining costs and effectiveness of  training: (practice 1) identifying the appropriate level of investment to  provide for training and development efforts and prioritize funding so that  the most important training needs are addressed first; (practice 4) having  criteria for determining whether to design training and development  programs in-house or obtain these services from a contractor or other  external source; (practice 6) tracking the cost and delivery of its training  and development programs agency-wide; and (practice 7) evaluating the  benefits achieved through training and development programs, including  improvements in individual and agency performance.
Why GAO Did This Study

The acquisition workforce manages and oversees billions of dollars in acquisition programs and contracts to help federal agencies get what they need, at the right time, and at a reasonable price; therefore, it is important that agencies provide adequate training to this workforce. In this review, GAO identified (1) the role of OFPP and the FAI in assisting agencies in meeting certification requirements; (2) agencies' approaches to providing training; and (3) the extent to which agencies collect information on the costs and benefits of their acquisition training. To determine OFPP and the FAI roles, GAO analyzed relevant legislation. GAO obtained information from 23 federal agencies on their training approaches through a questionnaire, and selected 4 agencies--the Departments of Education and the Treasury, DHS, and VA--to provide illustrative examples. GAO used its questionnaire and a subsequent data call to obtain information on how agencies collect information on the costs and benefits of their training.

What GAO Found

The Office of Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP) sets standards and policies for the federal acquisition workforce, and has established certification requirements, including minimal training, for the three main acquisition roles--contracting staff, Contracting Officer's Representatives, and Program/Project Managers--to promote the development of government-wide core acquisition competencies and facilitate mobility across agencies. DOD follows separate certification standards. The Federal Acquisition Institute (FAI), which is responsible for fostering and promoting the training and development of the acquisition workforce, works closely with OFPP and has initiatives underway to improve the collection and management of training information, including cost data and course evaluations; streamline communication of acquisition training guidance; and coordinate efforts to leverage acquisition workforce training resources throughout the government.
To support efforts for the acquisition workforce to attain and maintain federal certification requirements, most agencies (17 of 23) provide the majority of their acquisition training using external sources--vendors, FAI, the Defense Acquisition University, or other agencies. The Departments of Homeland Security (DHS), the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs (VA) operate their own permanent centers with dedicated resources that train the agency's acquisition workforce. Education reported using a different approach to providing acquisition training--it gets most of its training from other government entities. Federal agencies face similar challenges in providing training to their acquisition workforce. The top challenges reported by agencies in obtaining training for their acquisition workforce involved having sufficient resources. Twenty of 23 agencies identified obtaining adequate funding and 19 of 23 identified obtaining sufficient staff to manage training as challenging. In addition, almost half of the agencies reported that the fundamental step of identifying the acquisition workforce is a challenge especially when members of the workforce are involved in acquisitions as a secondary and not primary duty.
The training cost data that agencies collect is not comparable and agencies have limited information on the benefits of their acquisition workforce training investments. Although almost all agencies provided some cost data in response to GAO's questionnaire and subsequent data call, the agencies' cost data did not allow for government-wide assessment of their training investment. To date, FAI's efforts to collect training cost data has also met with limited success. Cost data collected in 2012 by GAO and FAI included different cost components-- such as facilities, travel, and instructors--which do not allow for government-wide analysis. Having comparable training cost data are important to inform FAI efforts to establish government-wide contracts for training. As for determining benefits of training, 7 of 23 federal agencies reported having no metrics, not even basic endof- course evaluations. Without basic data, agencies do not have insight into the benefits of their acquisition workforce training efforts.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that OFPP help ensure that agencies collect and report comparable cost data and assess the benefits of acquisition training by (1) providing further guidance on the cost data agencies are to report annually, and (2) requiring agencies to analyze course evaluations, at a minimum, to help assess the benefits of training investments. OFPP concurred with the recommendations and indicated it has started to take actions to provide additional guidance.