Gregory Sanders – författare

In a time of austerity, the U.S. government’s reliance on the private sector for a range of services has declined for two consecutive years. Even so, real services contract spending in 2012 remains more than 80 percent above the level in 2000. The CSIS Defense-Industrial Initiatives Group brings eight years of experience to the task of understanding this industry in flux. This report examines contract factors, like competition, funding mechanism, and vehicle, while also looking at industrial base factors like vendor market share by size and top contractors by total services revenue. The study team then applies this analysis to individual government customers and service areas. The 2000–2012 iteration of the report also significantly updates the policy implications chapter. This section examines the controversial topics of contract size and multi-award contracts to determine what the data say about their ramifications.

In a time of austerity, the U.S. Department of Defense has drawn budgetary savings primarily from reductions in private-sector contracting. The 2000-2012 edition of this report by National Security Program for Industry and Resources (NSPIR) at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) examines this trend as well as its broader implications for defense industrial policy. The report analyzes contracting for products, services, and research and development by the U.S. Department of Defense overall and by key components. The 2000-2012 report investigates seven key facets of the defense industrial base and provides detailed answers to pressing acquisition policy questions.

This report analyzes contracting for products, services, and research development by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and its key components. In provides an in-depth look at trends in DHS contracting since the establishment of the agency and provides an initial picture of the impact that sequestration has had on government contracting and the supporting industrial base. This third edition of the DHS report updates reports from previous years and provides greater depth of analysis. Additionally, for the first time, this year’s report examines trends in DHS grant awards, using publicly available data to examine what DHS is awarding grants for, and who is receiving those grants.

This report analyzes contracting for products, services, and research & development (R&D) by the Department of Defense (DoD) and its key components. In provides an in-depth look at trends in DoD contracting since 2000, and provides an initial picture of the impact that sequestration has had on DoD contracting and the supporting industrial base. This fourth edition of the DoD report updates reports from previous years and provides greater breadth of analysis. The report examines trends in DoD contracting, breaking down DoD contract spending by a variety of contract and vendor characteristics. The report then uses this data to address key policy questions related to DoD contracting.

Researching and manufacturing fighters, ships, and tanks are only part of the picture for defense contracts. Contracting for services accounts for over 41 percent of DoD contract obligations in 2018. Services include maintaining equipment, moving people and things, creating software, providing server space, and construction. Service contracting is challenging as services can be difficult to define and measure. But services are increasingly central to the U.S. economy. The Department of Defense seeks to attract new firms that will increase its speed and agility—many of these firms are service providers, e.g., data analytics or cloud computing. CSIS looked at a million contracts to evaluate how three factors influence performance: 1.service complexity 2.contract-management capacity 3.vendor’s history working with a DoD contracting office The existing data fails to explain large differences in contract office performance. More DoD transparency about contracting office capacity could help make a case for further investments.The report also found that when vendors and contracting offices have a longer history, they tend to have better results. That means DoD needs to think not only about recruiting new partners, but also about helping them succeed.