GSA's pricing data plan may do more harm than good

NOTE: This article first appeared on

The General Services Administration's watchdog again raised concerns over plans to move ahead with a three-year Transactional Data Reporting (TDR) pilot program, at the expense of two other contract provisions it says helps federal buyers save money.

In comments on the GSA's strategy to extend its TDR pilot for another year after its planned conclusion this December, the GSA Office of Inspector General said it remains concerned TDR could cripple the agency's buying schedules, which include IT Schedule 70, because it has yet to produce useable pricing data. The comments were dated July 26 but publicly released this week.

GSA's TDR pilot collects pricing data from vendor volunteers, including prices paid by government customers, for products and services sold under agency contracts. It hopes the data gathered could level out pricing for federal buyers. When it was launched, the GSA OIG characterized the pilot as "the most significant change to GSA's Multiple Award Schedules Program in over 20 years." However, it warned at the beginning of the pilot and again in recent comments that the effort had produced no significant measurable pricing data federal agencies could use.

In the filing, the OIG warned GSA's move to replace two significant data programs with TDR could leave the schedules program without a way to measure vendor pricing data. TDR would replace Commercial Sales Practices (CSP), where contractors disclose commercial sales data, and the Price Reductions Clause (PRC) that requires vendors to adjust pricing for an item across the board if they negotiate an initial lower price for it with a single agency.

"Ultimately, we are concerned that, if the TDR pilot continues or TDR is implemented across all schedules as currently stipulated, the Schedules Program will no longer serve its intended purpose -- to 'provide competitive, market-based pricing that leverages the buying power of the federal government' -- to the detriment of government agencies and taxpayers," OIG wrote.

The OIG also took issue with the GSA's characterization of the cost "burden" of auditing GSA schedule contracts to verify vendors' compliance with contractual CSP and PRC requirements. It said GSA had overstated vendor cost and labor for those audits and that those reviews had found millions in unreported vendor price reductions.

The OIG report maintained that the data from the CSP and pricing adjustments in the PRC are the "cornerstone" of GSA's general schedule program because they deliver on the goal of providing lowest cost goods and services.

About the Author

Mark Rockwell is a senior staff writer at FCW, whose beat focuses on acquisition, the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Energy.

Before joining FCW, Rockwell was Washington correspondent for Government Security News, where he covered all aspects of homeland security from IT to detection dogs and border security. Over the last 25 years in Washington as a reporter, editor and correspondent, he has covered an increasingly wide array of high-tech issues for publications like Communications Week, Internet Week, Fiber Optics News, magazine and Wireless Week.

Rockwell received a Jesse H. Neal Award for his work covering telecommunications issues, and is a graduate of James Madison University.

Click here for previous articles by Rockwell. Contact him at or follow him on Twitter at @MRockwell4.

Reader Comments

Please post your comments here. Comments are moderated, so they may not appear immediately after submitting. We will not post comments that we consider abusive or off-topic.

Please type the letters/numbers you see above.


WT Daily

Sign up for our newsletter.

Terms and Privacy Policy consent

I agree to this site's Privacy Policy.