Page 56 - FCW, May/June 2020

TheLectern
Procurement challenges
An Army solicitation for ventilators offers yet another example of how nontraditional acquisition models can encourage innovation
and COVID-19
BY STEVE KELMAN
Longtime FCW readers may remember my frequently expressed enthusiasm for contests (“challenges” in government jargon) as an innovative procurement technique for government.
In a procurement challenge, the gov- ernment announces a problem it seeks to have solved. Anyone may submit a solution, and the government chooses a winner or winners. The govern- ment also specifies a monetary prize (hence the moniker “contest”) and further steps the government might take to support the winner(s).
During the Obama administra- tion, the General Services Admin- istration launched the website Challenge.gov to organize and promote contests. I have blogged about contests since 2009 and earlier called them the single most important innova- tion in government contracting
in the last decade.
Aside from unleashing
grassroots innovations, contests have another important (and cool) feature: You don’t need to be an expert on government procurement to submit an entry. There is no proposal. It is a great example of why “show, don’t tell” should be more important in govern- ment procurement.
Research on the use of contests in the private sector by Harvard Busi- ness School Professor Karim Lakhani shows that many winners are small, garage players — and often students. These kinds of entrants would never
bid on conventional government pro- curements, so contests can therefore reduce the barriers to entry to govern- ment contracting.
The Army recently decided to deploy a procurement contest for bet- ter and cheaper ventilators in the fight against COVID-19. The challenge is
sponsored by xTech- Search (an
choose to include videos of up to three minutes explaining their ideas. “Pro- duction value does not matter at all,” the solicitation states.
The evaluation criteria are explained in plain English. For example, for clini- cal mission requirements, the solicita- tion states: “Argue your solution meets these requirements: Respiratory rate of 0 to 60 bpm; tidal volume of 50 to 1000 mL; ability to measure and control peak inspiratory pressure; adjustable inspiratory to expiratory time ratio; ability to support triggered breaths;
provides positive end expiratory pres- sure (PEEP); able to use ambient air, or low-pressure oxygen.” The solicitation presents rela- tive evaluation weights for the
various criteria.
This contest, like many, is
very high-speed. Submissions were accepted starting April 5, and reviews of promising proposals were sched- uled to begin on April 13. “Applicants should be prepared to deliver a vir- tual pitch of their concept within one week of submitting the application,” the solicitation states.
It is nice we now have this procure- ment tool in our toolkit to be able to quickly encourage innovation in such a critical area. n
Steve Kelman is a professor of public management at Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government and former administrator of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy. His blog can be found at fcw.com/thelectern.
Army program launched in 2018) under the auspices of the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics and Technol- ogy. First-stage winners will receive $10,000 to develop a prototype. Final winners may receive contracts for up to $1 million to provide ventilators
to the Army.
The requirements to enter are sim-
ple. Entrants must provide descrip- tions of their ideas in less than 1,500 characters and the estimated cost for delivering 10,000 ventilators. They may
50
May/June 2020 FCW.COM