Commitment, Context, and Discipline are crucial for achieving success in any industry, including Federal Contracting. This blog is going to provide you context related to terms you can (and should) encounter regularly, as a Government Contracting Executive and Professional.

The Federal Procurement Data System, or FPDS, is a robust and timely data source for everyday transactions executed by federal agencies. It is the most exploited by non-federal contractors, the most overlooked by contractors, and the most misunderstood by pretty much everyone. It is a treasure trove boasting a bevy of useful answers, literally at your fingertips. It’s also a divining rod, as it can and will lead you to other treasures, if you only learn to understand what you’re observing. Oh, and the rumors of FPDS’ demise were greatly exaggerated. It is still the source that many, in and out of Government and Government Contracting, use to complete tasks, even when they don’t realize they are using it.

Two of the many terms captured in the FPDS Data Dictionary, and referenced in the system and its outputs, are Contracting and Funding, as they relate to functional roles of various organizatons. Have you ever queried these to understand their influence on information you see in FPDS, and other data repositories?

When you encounter the terms:

You are observing the heirarchy of entities in FPDS that are responsible for issuing and administering agreement, contracts, contract vehicles, orders and modifications. It’s a pretty significant role of responsibility, given that those working in these organizations with the title Contracting Officer, are the only one’s in all of the Federal Government with legal authority to contractually bind Uncle Sam, and obligate funds to the resulting contracts.

But it’s not the only organization vendors need to be aware of, nor the most important one.

In FPDS, there is an expanded view of each transaction known as the C.A.R. or Contract Action Report. This is the transmittal from Contracting Organizations to FPDS, at least the part that’s publicly viewable. In that information, you will discover information than available on the previous page, to include a reference to the ‘Purchasers,’ namely the Contracting and Funding organizations. As is the case with Contracting, you will find information about the:

Unlike Contracting, Funding organizations don’t execute procurements. Let me qualify that. They don’t execute procurements above the Micropurchase Threshold, unless a Blanket Purchase Agreement (BPA) has been put in place for them to issue Call Tags (BPA Call) against. However, they do have a role that directly impacts Contracting activities. The Funding organization is typically the one submitting requisitions for supplies or services, and providing the funds to pay for it. So, if the funding office has no needs and no money, Contracting, ostensibly, would be bored.

Why in the world does any of this matter?

It depends on a number of criteria, unique to you. They include (but are by no means limited to):

Here’s something else to consider. If you were to run a report on a specific Contracting Department/Agency/Office based on their unique ID, to see what they purchased during a certain period, you would receive a result depicting obligations, vendors, etc. If you run that same report, but this time using the unique ID of a Funding Department/Agency/Office, you will receive a very different result from the standpoint of obligations, what was purchased, how it was purchased and who made the purchases.

Keep in mind, the Contracting and Funding entities you see represented in the data are real organizations in actual locations, and the work-home to real people, the pandemic not withstanding. 

I’m just going to leave this here. Feel free to ask questions or even contest what I’m sharing. It’s all for the greater good of what we do everyday in The American Small Business Coalition.

We help people win.

 

Peace, Health and Success,

Go-To-Guy Timberlake