Procurement Countdown Winter 2003 No. 126

Highlights...ARC has awards, new personneland promotions on pages 2, 4,and 15.

Procurement Award Winnersare listed on page 4.

See how a procurementprofessional’s idea got Flat

Stanley aboard the SpaceShuttle, page 5.

Meet the new Deputy AssistantAdministrator for Procurement,Chuck Duff, page 6.

LaRC’s construction guru isfeatured on page 8.

GRC has articles about IFM andTask Orders on pages 9 and 12,respectively

GSFC says good-bye toProcurement Officer, MikeLadomirak on the back page.

A Message from the Assistant AdministratorBy Tom Luedtke

It has been just over 48hours since the Columbiadisaster. NASA, and thecountry are still reeling, stilltrying to come to terms withwhat has happened. In myoffice, people are more quiettoday than usual. There is littlelaughter – something that can beheard most days here. I’m sureit is like that at most NASAcenters and at many officesthroughout the country. Manyof you were here when theChallenger tragedy occurred.You know what a time ofmourning and hard work areahead. For others, includingme, this is a first, and I hope, alast. For all of us, it brings intofocus the reality and dangers ofspace travel. And I hope itbrings a sense of pride in NASAand the work we do. I knowpeople here say that by being apart of NASA, and the greatthings NASA does, makes thisterrible experience a little easierto bear.

Working at NASA is notjust working a government job.It’s different. It’s not like

working at HUD or Energy orTreasury. NASA does some-thing that touches people in away no other agency can. Byexploring space, sending outspacecraft to study planets andstars, and running experiments,NASA fills people with theexcitement of exploration andwith hope for the future. Maybe

your job in procurement has youworking on the shuttle or on themissions that flew on STS-107.Maybe your job barely touchesspace flight. But we are all partof the NASA mission.

The focus of procurement atsome centers will change greatlyin the next few weeks as we dealwith shuttle contracts and otherrelated issues. In the long term,we may find other contractingissues we must deal with as off-shoots of these events. Butalong with that are the regularjobs that must still be done.Request for Proposals must goout, contracts must be awarded.Business will not be as usual, butthe usual business must go on.

We all must face the sorrowof what has happened and theway it affects us personally, aspart of the NASA Family, andas a grieving nation. If, incoming weeks, you find youneed to talk about this tragedyand how it has affected you, Iencourage you to seek out theresources of the EmployeeAssistance Program at yourcenter and use it.

Remember that while we allshare this tragedy, we all sharethe NASA future, and we will allplay a part in getting there.

Winter 2003 page 2

Two from Ames Get Kaufhardt Peer AwardsBy Joanne Comstock, Ames Research Center

Beverley Mesa and ChristineMunroe of Ames’ AcquisitionDivision were presented with theannual Leslie A. Kaufhardt PeerAward in recognition of theirachievements and accomplish-ments during FY 02.

The Peer Awards wereestablished in 1986 to recognizenon-supervisory personnel “whomade special or outstandingcontributions” to the AcquisitionDivision. Nominations are madeby division personnel, excludingmanagers and committee mem-bers. In 1994, the name of theaward was changed to honor ourlate colleague, Leslie Kaufhardt.A past chair of the committee,Leslie was also a consummateprofessional who embodied theenthusiasm and willingness to gothe extra mile that these awardsseek to recognize.

Bev Mesa is an administra-tive assistant in the AcquisitionBranch for Aeronautics. She wasrecognized for her excellentsupport, professional manner, andwillingness to take on andcomplete tasks for both herbranch and the division. Bev actsas liaison between contractors,contract specialists, other NASAsites, and various branch chiefs,going out of her way to assist incustomer and contractor inquiriesand resolve issues where possible.Throughout the approachingimplementation of IFMP at

Ames, she relieved contractspecialists of their closeoutworkload. Bev is a motivatedindividual who is always ready,willing, and able to learn newthings. She goes out of her wayto help her organization in anyway she can. She assisted thecontract specialists in her branchby preparing purchase orders forContracting Officers, in the

process obtaining quotes fromvendors and gathering all docu-mentation necessary for award.Bev has taken the initiative ofdeveloping and maintaining acurrent knowledge base of theseprocedures by participating as anactive, contributing member ofthe division’s Simplified Acquisi-tion Process Team.

Christine Munroe is acontract specialist for the Acqui-sition Branch for Center Opera-tions and Space. Christine wasrecognized for her role as aleader in this past year’s SBIRprogram awards. During theabsence of a more senior Con-tracting Officer, Christine

stepped in to help minimize theburden of this year’s programon other team members. Shespent a great deal of timeaddressing the requirements ofthe SBIR program office, theninterpreted those needs andprovided contract specialistswith valuable information andassistance. Her efforts andinsights to the process wereconsidered particularly notablein light of the heavy workloadsbeing carried by all the con-tract specialists involved.

Christine is also com-mended for her consistency inprojecting a positive attitude,even under adversity; bybringing an uplifted spirit andlightheartedness to the work-place. She is described by herpeers as a strong motivator—or, more simply, “a rock”—who mentors fellow contractspecialists, interns, and stu-dents. Christine’s willingnessto extend herself on behalf ofher colleagues demonstrateswhat a credit she is to herbranch and the division.

The award winners havecontributed to improvedperformance, efficiency andmorale, which has strengthenedrelationships within the divi-sion and with other director-ates. Congratulations Bev andChristine!

Winter 2003 page 3

People onthe Move

The list ofPeople on theMove onlyincludes thosenames thatwere submittedto theProcurementCountdown. Ifyou knowpeople whoshould be listedin this column,contact yourCenterProcurementCountdownpoint of contact,or send thenames to theeditor, SusieMarucci, on(202) 358-1896, or e-mail at susie.marucci@hq.nasa.gov.

GRCFarewell: Wayne Girard,

procurement specialist,Aeropropulsion ProcurementBranch, retired in January2003. We wish him all the bestin his future endeavors.

Changes — Developmen-tal Assignments: Angel Paganhas just returned from anassignment with the FederalExecutive Board. Tom Spiceris beginning an assignment withthe Commercial TechnologyOffice. Alice Wilson is begin-ning her last developmentalassignment under the NewLeadership Program.

GSFCCongratulations: The

newest member of our procure-ment management team isSandra Marshall. Leigh AnneGiraldi is now the AssociateChief for NASA HeadquartersProcurement. Sue Gonser andSteve Lloyd are now procure-ment managers for the HQProcurement Office. Other

recent promotions include:Wanda Behnke, administrativesystems analyst; Mary AnnBishop, administrative systemsanalyst; Theresa Keane, adminis-trative systems analyst; DawnMurvin, administrative systemsanalyst; Larry Smith, administra-tive systems analyst.

Recent selections fromclerical to professional includeCandace Schumacher, adminis-trative systems analyst; PatriciaJefferson, administrative systemsanalyst; Kimber Russell, admin-istrative systems analyst. FredLittle was recently convertedfrom a co-op to a full-timeemployee.

New Faces: Welcome newemployees Jim Geiser and JanetLangweil. Janet Langweil is anew but old Contracting Officerwho has come back to us fromthe DOE. Chris Whyte is theContracting Officer for theAgency CSOC Procurement atthe HQ Procurement Officeworking with Chris Jedrey atHeadquarters.

Farewell: Sandra Cover toDept. of Justice; Cathy Cavey to

Code 205; Gifford Moak to Code400; Glenna Paulson to Import/Export Bank; Brad Poston toNSF; and Loren Sunell to Dept.of Commerce.

LaRCCongratulations: Sandi

Ray. Sandi, the Deputy Procure-ment Officer, will be acting headof Human Resources for severalmonths, until a permanentreplacement is appointed. DuringSandi’s absence, Ginny Wycoffand Panice Clark will be helpingProcurement Officer Kim Stonehold down the fort.

JSCNew Faces: During the last

few months of 2002, CraigBurridge joined the Science andAnalysis Procurement Office.Bob Derr and Kathleen Martensjoined the Institutional Procure-ment Office. Billy Perry trans-ferred from Randolph AFB, TX,and joined the Space OperationsProcurement Office. Virginia(Ginny) Stephenson and SusanStefanovic joined the ProjectsProcurement Office. SusanStarkweather joined the ShuttleProcurement Office.

From the EditorWith the exception of the article on the front page, all the articles in this issue were written before

the Columbia tragedy. These articles have not been changed. This issue may, in some places, have alighter tone or reflect the way things were before the tragedy.

Winter 2003 page 4

Boy Are We Glad to See You!By Carolyn S. La Follette, Ames Research Center

“Nobody knows you whenyou’re down and out.”

Well, that may not be quitethe case here, but the AmesAcquisition Division has beendown and out relative to staffing.Being unable to hire for the lasttwo years has been taking its tollon those of us remaining. Duringthe summer of 2002, we wereauthorized to advertise internallyat the center for some newblood. We were successful inhiring four new contract special-ists, three converting from otherpositions inside the division andone from outside the division.

The Procurement Officer,Connie Cunningham, devised awarm welcome for these indi-viduals. She provided themwhite mugs with blue backgroundand lettering that says “1102”three times on each side. Themugs were decorated with a bowand colored cellophane and filledwith candies.

One of my tasks is to be a“procurement guru” to the

“newbies.” Ames has one NCIP(procurement) intern and onerecently graduated internal co-op,so I include them as well in thesemeetings. We meet on a monthlybasis and discuss various topicsrelated to acquisition. It is meantto be different from their on-the-job-handling-purchase-requeststraining. For example, we havediscussed contracting authority,

the Space Act of 1958, andwarranting. Each time I providetwo or three questions thatrequire them to do a search in theFAR and/or NFS to find theanswer for the next meeting.One of the goals is to impressupon them that part of being a

successful contract specialist isto learn to use the regulation,but not hide behind it. In otherwords, “when in doubt, read theregulation” – don’t go asksomeone for the answer to anew problem you may haveencountered.

All of the new contractspecialists are enjoying theirjobs and are doing well; someof them completed negotiatingand awarding their first con-tracts with the FY 02 Phase ISBIRs. The SBIRs, especiallythe Phase I’s, are a greatlearning tool for new contractspecialists. This is especiallytrue here at Ames where wetend not to have a lot of smallercontracts in a given year onwhich one can learn the tricksof the trade.

I am confident that over theyears each will grow in his/hernew role as contract specialistand it will make a great career,as it has for the rest of us.

Eight NASA Procurement professionals and one person from outside the procurement organizationwere chosen to receive the 2002 Annual Procurement Awards. These awards are the highest procurementhonors at NASA. The annual procurement awards are used to recognize those people and centers thathave made outstanding contributions to the procurement effort throughout NASA. As in past years, it wasa very tough competition with many worthy candidates nominated by the centers.

The winners of the awards are:Contract Manager of the Year: Mary L. Kincaid (JSC)Contract Specialist of the Year: Rhonda O. Baker (ARC)Simplified Acquisition Specialist of the Year: Jill Willard (ARC)MidRange/Commercial Person of the Year: Ernest C. Mensurati (GRC)Grants Specialist of the Year: Heidi D. Shaw (GRC)Procurement Analyst of the Year: Jeffery Lupis (HQ)Procurement Support Person of the Year: Terri Keane (GSFC)Procurement Supervisor of the Year: Paivi H. Tripp (GRC)COTR of the Year: Samuel A. McPherson, III (LaRC)

2002 Procurement Award Winners

Winter 2003 page 5

HS Analyst Sends Flat Stanley to the ISSYou may ask who is this

analyst and what is a FlatStanley? The analyst happensto be Harold Jefferson in theOffice of Procurement, Pro-gram Operations Division. Hepresently staffs requirementsfor the Marshall Space FlightCenter (MSFC), InternationalSpace Station (ISS) Program,and the Office of Biologicaland Physical Research. Allright, you say, I can acceptHarold as analyst, but is FlatStanley a new hire in the Officeof Procurement? No, FlatStanley could not meet thephysical requirements for theanalyst position. But guesswhat, Flat Stanley has traveledall over the world as a privi-leged guest. Enough suspense!

Flat Stanley comes from astory written by Jeff Brownabout a little boy with apositive attitude. That boy,Stanley, was smashed flat whena bulletin board fell on him.Flat Stanley as a constructionpaper cut-out, has been partici-pating with elementary age kidsfor about 40 years. Normally,all the young kids are requiredto complete a project involvingFlat Stanley. Each student mustwrite a letter to someonerequesting that Flat Stanleybecome part of their workplace, home, travel, or vacationfor a limited period of time. Atthe completion of the visit, thehosts are asked to provide asummary back to the studentdescribing what fun things theyand Flat Stanley accomplished.

You’ve probably guessed itby now. I am Harold Jeffersonand I was chosen by a secondgrader named Vernon Tate in

King George County, VA, togive Flat Stanley an adventure.Vernon attends Potomac Elemen-tary in Dahlgren, VA. You areprobably wondering what is theconnection or how he found me.Over the last few years, theOffice of Procurement seniormanagement has allowed me toparticipate in the school’s career

day. This has given me anopportunity to take NASAmaterials, astronauts, andscientists to the school to pro-mote the importance of educationand share the NASA missions.

On the RoadNow you are probably

wondering what Flat Stanley andI did for fun. To be honest withyou, I am sure he had more funalong his journey than I did. Thefirst thing I did was to take FlatStanley on a business trip to theJohnson Space Center. Mycohorts for this trip were JamesBalinksas (director, ProgramOperations Division) and TomRussell (HS analyst). Mycolleagues served as planners andphotographers along the way.While I had to work, Flat Stanleywas seen riding the SaturnRocket, sharing a moment withthe longhorns, kissing-up toastronauts, in the mission controlroom, and in the shuttle cockpit

mock-up. I guess it really is morefun for the family/friends whenyou take them on a business trip.

But wait, Flat Stanley’sjourney was not over! This wildidea came into my head. I askedthe Assistant Administrator forProcurement, Tom Luedtke, if hethought the Administrator wouldtake a picture with Flat Stanley.Tom suggested that I contactSean O’Keefe’s assistant, ShironGaines. I promptly followed upon his suggestion. I called Shironand introduced myself and thepurpose for the call. I wasrequested to bring Flat Stanleyand a copy of the letter fromVernon to her office. A few dayslater, she informed me that theAdministrator wanted to fly FlatStanley on Endeavour in June(last summer) on a trip to theInternational Space Station! I wastotally surprised by the turn ofevents. Uh, it goes to show yourfriends will abandon you in aheartbeat for an adventurousflight to a neat place like theInternational Space Station. Butas you will see later, Flat Stanleydid return to thank me.

Flat Stanley spent 14 days inspace, made 171 orbits aroundthe earth and logged almost 5million miles. That’s what I callfrequent flier miles.

A Trip to SchoolRemember earlier I said “I

was surprised by the turn ofevents.” I was not aware theAdministrator and two astronautswere planning to personallyreturn Flat Stanley to Vernon at

(continued on page 15)

NAS

A/Bi

ll Ing

alls

Mr. Jefferson is the last man on the top row.

Winter 2003 page 6

A Closer Look:Chuck Duff: To California By Susie Marucci, Headquarters

If things stay calm the firstcouple of weeks, then you’ll beOK – or maybe you’ll just haveto decide to be OK anyway... Atleast, that’s how it looks toChuck Duff. The acting DeputyAssistant Administrator forProcurement, and the first deputyhere in years, has had more thanhis share of surprises when hewalks into a new job. This job isno exception. Fortunately forhim, most of the surprises havebeen good ones.

“I love this job. It’s fun,”Chuck says. As the secondhighest procurement person atNASA these days, he doesn’thave a bad job. But it isn’t justthis job. It’s all of the jobs he’shad in the procurement arena.Let’s face it: it’s rare to meet aperson who so clearly loves whathe does, especially in the govern-ment. This job, in the Office ofProcurement, is a homecoming ofsorts.

After starting his career in theAir Force, Chuck spent three anda half years at the Office ofProcurement, from 1992 to 1995.“I left the Air Force because Iwanted to expand my horizons. Iwanted an agency with threethings: It had to be a civilianagency, with a focus on R&D,and have cost reimbursablecontracts. That meant NASA. Itwas totally opposite from the AirForce.” For one of those years atHeadquarters, Chuck was theexecutive officer to the AA forProcurement, Don Bush. In fact,Chuck was at NASA all of sevendays when he was plucked fromnear obscurity to be the AA’s

exec. Chuck landed at NASA,walked right into one of themyriad fire drills always goingon, and got the AA’s attention.Things like that happen to Chuckall the time. He worked closelywith Bush and then with thedeputy who came in part waythrough his tenure – Dee Lee.When Bush was getting ready toleave, he gave Chuck a choice ofwhich division he wanted to goto. Chuck chose the ProgramOperations division. “I love theprogram stuff. I always have.”

He ended up doing procurementwork for all of the Marshallpropulsion issues on suchprograms as the shuttle and thespace station (during the rede-sign). He handled all the ELVsat Goddard and Glenn (Lewisback then). At one point theMSFC work alone that he wasinvolved with was worth morethan $4.5 billion in total value.He especially enjoyed his in-volvement with the Office ofSpace Flight and shuttle propul-sion. “I had one small part in theprogram. Code M is full of goodpeople who want to do the rightthing. They had a very difficultset of work issues.”

Chuck was a Code HSanalyst in 1995, loving his job,when he got an unexpected phonecall. Dennis Brown, the Procure-ment Officer at ARC was

looking for a new policy officerand pricing chief. He askedChuck to come out to do thejob. Chuck did. He said, “Icame to DC to diversify and toincrease my perspective, then Iwent to Ames for the samereasons.”

The Left CoastAfter a year, he had settled

into the job and was enjoyingit. He had actually made it longenough that he thought nothingunusual was going to happen,when it happened again.Suddenly, in June 1996, Dennisretired and Chuck was chosenas the Procurement Officer. Hehadn’t gone out to Amesexpecting anything like that.However, it turned out to be avery interesting job. During histime at Ames, he assisted in theareas of life sciences, spacesciences, earth science, and theHuman Exploration andDevelopment of space. He wasProcurement Officer for overseven years when the nextunexpected call came.

When Tom Luedtke tookover as the Associate Adminis-trator for Procurement (nowAssistant Administrator), hewas acting and there was nodeputy. Later, when he waspermanently made the AA in1999, the climate at Headquar-ters precluded AAs who didn’talready have deputies fromhiring them. So for the pastthree years, Tom has run theOffice of Procurement withouta strong right-hand person.

Winter 2003 page 7

This last year, the climatechanged again. That plus thework on Competitive Sourcingand the JPL contract negotia-tion were too much for one AAand three division directors.Tom was given permission tobring on a deputy. Chuck gotthe call. But this time, movingback east with children inschool was not that easy. SoChuck’s family stayed inCalifornia, and he came back toHeadquarters on a one-yeardetail.

Back EastOnce back at Headquar-

ters, Chuck hit the groundrunning. He quickly gotinvolved in putting out fires andwas noticed by the NASAChief of Staff, Courtney Stadd.In late January, Chuck wasmade an offer he couldn’trefuse. Courtney asked him tobe the Freedom to Manage co-chair. While this plum assign-ment means a lot more traveland trying to fit in his ‘real’work in Procurement, Chuck isvery excited. “It gives us achance to decide what needs toget done, to see what is stand-ing in the way, and to collec-tively decide what we don’tneed to do.” He believespeople have to put their heartinto a job like Freedom toManage. They can’t beindifferent, he said, they mustbe willing to invest.

While Chuck wasn’t atHeadquarters for the inceptionof Freedom to Manage, he hasquickly become a staunch

advocate. “People don’t have tobe too careful, but they have tobe prudent. If something is in theway and can be removed, do it.”He thinks everyone needs to besmarter about the issues aroundmanaging. He also thinks thatpeople must believe in themselvesand what they are doing. “If youbelieve you can make a differ-ence,” he says, “then you act onthat belief in a constructiveway.” It becomes a self-fulfillingprophesy, according to Chuck.

While Freedom to Manageand the Procurement Office giveChuck plenty of work andresponsibilities, they don’t affecthis attitude. “We are in atremendously fun business… wecan use our technical and busi-ness imagination. It’s challeng-ing, yet rewarding. I love what Ido.”

Chuck’s love of acquisitionwork goes back to his earlybeginnings as a civilian in the AirForce in 1984. During his eightyears, he worked on two pro-grams he was especially proudof. The first was his work in theGlobal Positioning Satelliteprogram office. Chuck boughtthe first block of operationalsatellites. The second Air Forceprogram was in the Defense

Support Program, a MissileLaunch Detection system. “It is avery important program tocountry,” Chuck says. “It wasthe only Air Force multiyearcontract at that time.” Chuckstarted on that program as a GS-7. It was a $1.5 billion program.In the beginning, it was Chuck, atechnical expert, and a pricer. “Ihad way more authority rightfrom the beginning than themoney that goes with it.” He wasinvolved in this program from thestart of the acquisition strategythrough the contract award.“From the first day in the govern-ment, I got to do things that werevery interesting in nature. I’vebeen absolutely blessed in mycareer.”

Chuck worked at the Penta-gon during the “Ill Wind” investi-gation. He calls it his Gilligan’sIsland tour. It was supposed tobe for 3 weeks, but ended upbeing 4 years. “It’s the hardestwork I’ve ever done and some ofthe saddest.” His job was to keepprograms going while the seniorlevel officials who had access tothe programs were being investi-gated and, in some cases, con-victed. While it was hard workand difficult to see the harm andserious impact on the procure-ment profession, Chuck took realpride in his work. “It was a greatsense of reward, working withseveral major investigativeagencies, senior Air Force, andOSD leadership to work throughthe issues and keep the missionsafloat,” he said.

(continued on page 11)

and Back Again

Winter 2003 page 8

Getting the Job Done!

The Construction Guru – Richard C. ShislerBy Tim Stubbs, Langley Research Center

One minute it is behind thedesk reviewing the FAR, and thenext it is on with the hard hatattending a site visit with a groupof local construction firms. AsLangley’s elite constructioncontracts professional, RichardShisler has become accustomed tosuch diverse transition. Today,Richard is the lead for Construc-tion Contracting in Langley’s

Service andConstructionContractingBranch. But hehad quite a tripgetting here.

In 1964,after four yearsin the Navy,Richard went towork as amechanicaltechnician at the

federally funded Space RadiationEffects Laboratory (SREL), nowknown as Jefferson Laboratories.Then, in 1978, with federalbudget cuts leaving the future ofSREL uncertain, Richard decidedit was time for a change. That’swhen he started his governmentcareer as a lab technician work-ing at LaRC. He was assigned tothe Operations Support Divisionworking on laser system technolo-gies and maintaining the labs’vacuum systems. The move wasnot a big shock in terms ofculture since NASA, at that time,regularly conducted experimentsat SREL. So Richard already hadthe opportunity to work withmany LaRC engineers andtechnicians.

Richard’s quest to improvehimself during his career has beentruly inspirational. While work-ing full time as a technician and

supporting a family of five,Richard attended college at nightfor ten years. He received hisBachelor’s Degree in BusinessAdministration from ChristopherNewport University in 1980.

Richard made the big switchin 1983. That’s when he washired from his NASA engineeringtechnician job into a developmen-tal position in procurement. Helearned his new trade quickly,and rose to his first lead Con-tracting Officer position (inconstruction) within six years.Richard persevered through theofficial elimination of the leadpositions in procurement atLangley in the mid-nineties, andcontinued to provide leadershipin an unofficial capacity in all ofhis assignments. Richard wasone of the first to express aninterest when lead positions werebrought back in 2001. He wasthe logical choice for the con-struction team lead job.

Richard considers construc-tion contracting to be the mostexciting and rewarding of all thecontract work he’s done. “Theconstruction business is withouta doubt, one of the most competi-tive industries,” noted Richard.“Most of the constructioncontractors that work at LaRCare small businesses that taketheir successes and failures verypersonally. One poorly managedjob could cost them their busi-ness and even jeopardize theirpersonal finances. Being a partof their successes and knowingyou have helped some of themavoid failure is very gratifying.”

Richard feels that “themanagement here at LaRCallows you all the freedom andresponsibility you can handle for

decision-making. This latitude,combined with the uniquenessand diversity of personalitiesand projects, makes for anever-challenging and rewardingcareer. It’s a win-win situationfor everyone involved inconstruction contracting. Inthis job you’re constantlylearning from all your experi-ences both good and bad.”Displaying his refreshing senseof humor, he says, “unfortu-nately you learn faster from thebad ones.” He believes thatattitude goes a long way, andthat integrity and tenacity or“stick-to-it-ness” make you awinner every time. He thinksbeing in the right place at theright time is an added bonus.

Richard grew up in SouthPhiladelphia and attendedBishop Neumann High School.He is emphatic that the “PhillyCheese Steak” is not overrated,but the idea of a “mild man-nered catholic nun is,” and hehas the scars to prove it. He isthankful that he was brought upin a family environment thattaught him good morals, goodmanners, and a good workethic.

Richard considers himself a“short timer” and we expect tosee him leave us in the next fewyears. When he does leave, itwill be the Agency’s loss. Butwe will attempt to carryforward the numerous things hehas taught us in dealing withconstruction contracts. Rich-ard will spend his time doingthings he enjoys like travelingwith his wife exploring thecountry, and spending time withhis children and grandchildren.

Winter 2003 page 9

What’s it all about:

Implementing IFM Core Financial at GRCBy Doreen Medzi, Glenn Research Center

If you have yet to imple-ment the IFM Core Financialsystem at your center, you maywonder what it has to do withprocurement. However, ifyou’ve been keeping up with allthe IFM-related articles thathave been published in theProcurement Countdown or,better still, have gone throughthe system implementation, youunderstand that the implemen-tation of this software haseverything to do with Procure-ment. For starters, a tremen-dous implementation effort wasrequired by a team of somevery dedicated and hardworking individuals.

A GRC IFM purchasingteam was formed a year inadvance of implementation, inNovember 2001, to perform avariety of activities rangingfrom making GRC SAPconfiguration decisions regard-ing how documents would berouted and approved to howbest to convert GRC legacysystem data to SAP. Theunique thing about this “pur-chasing” team was that it washighly cross-functional, con-sisting of a number of procure-ment and non-procurementpersonnel. This was absolutelynecessary since the purchasingsub-process part of IFMfocuses not only on procure-ment (i.e., PRs, contracts,purchase orders, closeouts,etc.) but also on aspects suchas goods receipts, purchases ofNASA Supply ManagementSystem (NSMS) items, and thebankcard program.

The team included expertsfrom the logistics area of the“purchasing” process: Bob Kingand Chuck Smith from Indynewere brought in to test andvalidate test results in the area ofreceiving and the many NSMSinterfaces. There was a financefaction that was also a part of theGRC purchasing team. BobStrunak was brought in tovalidate the financial posting testresults from the NSMS interface.

Sally Saltzman, also fromfinance, provided her expertise inthe area of grant payments aswell as many other financialareas.

The largest team contingentwas, of course, from procure-ment. Rita Poulsen, DoreenMedzi, and Maryann Pawsonprovided well-rounded bankcardprogram expertise. Doreen wasalso the overall expert on justabout any issue that had anythingto do with the SAP purchasemodule. Kurt Straub and MaryLou Guthrie functioned as ourteam experts on all questionsdealing with a wide variety ofcontracts. Kurt was also the keyprocurement person with regardto data conversion. Jean Boylan

provided the team with her manyyears of expertise in the area ofsimplified acquisitions. TomPalisin, our legacy systemsexpert, assisted in the successfulconversion of GRC data to SAP.Toni Niebieszczanski fromIndyne and Bonnie Kaltensteinfrom Logistics performed a widerange of testing. Their experi-ences and input provided the teamwith a first look at how a userunfamiliar with the new processesand the new software would dealwith SAP. Their feedbackindicated a need for additionalGRC briefings for the largerGRC IFM user community.Sheryl Batesole, with the Pacecontract, through her years ofexperience with the GRC PRlegacy system, provided invalu-able input into the configurationof SAP PR approval routing (i.e.,release strategies). In retrospect,we probably would have beenwise to include also somerequisitioners and project manag-ers early on in the process. Asthey became more familiar withthe impact of the system onproject and program fundsmanagement, a separate effortwas required to address theirconcerns and to developworkarounds.

IntegrationSince the Core Financial

software is truly integrated, theteam worked with all functionalareas to ensure that configurationand conversion decisions thatwere made were in the bestinterest of all areas affected. The

(continued on next page)

Winter 2003 page 10

team was required to provide theleadership and take the initiativeto painstakingly research and insome cases negotiate configura-tion and data conversion deci-sions with other functional areassuch as finance, budget, andlogistics. It became clear thatend user communities ofapprovers and requisitionersneeded also be included in thesedecisions. In reality, no decisioncould be made that didn’t havean impact on more than one area.Often decisions were made, thenrevisited and revised severaltimes prior to implementation.Even with all of the research andnegotiation that was performedbefore decisions were finalized,decisions were again revisitedafter implementation and in somecases changes were required.

Since NASA is leading theway with regard to governmentimplementation of SAP, teammembers found themselves oftenin brand new territory. Theywere required to envisionpotential gaps between existingprocesses and the “to be” pro-cesses within SAP. The teamunderstood that new processesmight not resemble old processesand that the responsibility forperforming these tasks mightactually shift from one functionalarea to another. This type ofthinking led to some very innova-tive solutions and workarounds.Team members worked whennecessary with the GRC techni-cal community to developworkarounds and, to the extentpossible, to ease the transitionfrom GRC legacy systems to theIFM software.

Work and More WorkIn addition to software

testing, the purchasing teamacted in a number of otherimplementation roles. Approxi-mately half of the team acted astrainers for the more than 80instructor-led SAP training

classes while software testingwas still on-going. These classesserved to train approximately500 GRC SAP end users in rolesranging from requisitioner toagency buyer. In addition to theIFM Core Financial role-basedprescribed classes, team mem-bers developed and conductedbriefing sessions. These pro-vided information to GRC IFMsoftware users on GRC specificconfiguration decisions and datarequirements not covered by theAgency IFM training courses.At any given time, one teammember could be simultaneouslyresponsible for software testing,training, development of brief-ings, presentation of briefings,attendance at data conversionand change management meet-ings, as well as performing someof their standard job-relatedduties. In addition, a few of the

team members involved in theAgency IFM team were stilltraveling to Huntsville toperform Agency IFM team-related duties.

As you would expect withall of this exposure to the GRCcommunity at large, purchasingteam members were on thefront-lines of change manage-ment. While there were somebright moments, the role of achange agent was not alwaysone of the easier or moreglamorous aspects of the job.

As with any change, therewas a lot of skepticism frompeers and sometimes openhostility. Through it all, teammembers managed to maintaina positive attitude in the face ofanxiety, stress, and frustration.Team members often recountedtheir first experiences with thenew software. With thatunderstanding, they attemptedto alleviate some of the stressand frustration of the usercommunity.

As October grew near, thepurchasing team was asked togive even more of their timeand talent by working week-ends and holidays, late intonight, and what some peopleconsider early morning (1:00a.m.) preparing for GRC’s“IFM Go Live” date. But thetask did not stop after Go Live.

Many team memberscurrently continue to supportthe IFM implementationthrough staffing the IFM “WarRoom” (phone lines) and“Open House” (a place whereall purchase module users can

(continued from previous page)

IMF Core Financial

Winter 2003 page 11

While Chuck learned a lot inthe Air Force and will alwayscherish those days, it’s obvioushis real passion these days is atNASA. He understands manyaspects of the space program andclearly gets excited when talkingabout it. He loves the procure-ment work and the “other duties”like Freedom to Manage. “Iwouldn’t change a thing about mywork,” he says with a smile. “Iam lucky to feel that way.”

Chuck has again gotten usedto the fast pace and politicalnature of life at Headquarters.He is readjusting to the Washing-ton area. He even bought a TVlast week. But he admits it is hardbeing a part of a bi-coastalfamily. When he does get home,he spends time with his wife,Beth, and two children, son Karland daughter Courtney. Chuckenjoys skiing, motor and bicycleriding, and tennis. He took upgolf so he could play with hiskids while his wife (an instructorpilot) was teaching people to fly

Check out the IFMP Website

The NASA Procurement Library now has a site dedicated to IFMP with a FAQ page andother useful information. It is at:

http://ec.msfc.nasa.gov/hq/library/IFMP/welcome.html

bring and complete their SAPwork with the help of anexpert) or by making “HouseCalls”(assisting people at theirown desktop).

It has taken, and continuesto take, a tremendous amountof work to implement thismassive new system. It hasconsumed significant resourcesin the Procurement communityand taxed all of our capacityfor change. On the positiveside, the implementation hasincreased our understanding ofthe entire business process atGRC, brought different func-tional groups to closer coopera-tion with each other, andcultivated new leadershipamong the team members.

Understanding the Agencymandate, our goal has been tomake SAP work for people atGRC, and to support ourcustomers from requisitioners,to procurement and financestaff, to bankcard programparticipants, and to any otheruser community that touchesthe purchasing sub-process.

airplanes and so he had some-thing he couldn’t take too seri-ously. He says he can’t take golftoo seriously when he is as bad ashe is. But he enjoys spendingwhatever time he has with hiskids.

So what is next for Chuck?Will he go from acting deputy todeputy? Will he skip right toCode A and run something highprofile after Freedom to Manage?Will he go back to California andshake up Ames, again? We don’tknow. We’ll have to see what thenext unexpected phone call brings.

(continued from page 7)

Chuck Duff

Winter 2003 page 12

Managing Task Order ContractsBy Dennis Vano, Glenn Research Center

Task Order contracts have long been recognized as an enormously adaptable contracting method thatallows the government to enter into contracts before specific technical requirements are known. Thecontract statement of work is a general description of the services to be provided, while the individual taskorder statements of work are written with very specific technical requirements and performance metrics.Although task order contracts tremendously reduce procurement lead time, the benefit comes at a price.The management of a task order contract is extremely labor intensive, particularly when the contract is aCost-Plus Award Fee contract.

Contracting Officers usually delegate authority to Contracting Officer’s Technical Representatives(COTRs) who assist the project offices in developing performance-based statements of work. They alsodevelop government cost estimates that will be compared to the contractor’s cost estimates. Typically theproject offices are required to review and concur with the contractors’ estimated labor hours and otherdirect costs associated with the tasks before the estimated costs are negotiated by the Contracting Offic-ers. This process can take as long as two months and involve dozens of government and contractorpersonnel. Amendments to existing tasks usually go through the same process. For a contract with over200 active tasks, there are annually thousands of funding actions, contract deliverables, and task orderamendments. The effort required to manage this type of contract can be overwhelming.

At Glenn Research Center, the Systems Engineering Division (SED) developed a contract manage-ment tool for the new Glenn Engineering And Scientific Support (GESS) contract, which started in April2001. This web-based tool enables the government to track the status of all GESS contract actions whilereducing the average time of issuing a new task to less than four calendar days. It began in December2000, when the division directed Dynacs, Inc. to develop the tool for the GESS contract. Dynacs assignedthe task of developing this tool to Linda Kenik. She had just completed development of a web-basedengineering standards tool known as the Engineering Standards Wizard For SED.

Ms. Kenik coordinated a number of meetings with the NASA Contract Management Team thatconsisted of Mark Manthey, Contracting Officer; Tom Burke, COTR; and Virginia Cestaro, Alternate

COTR. The purpose of the meetings was to flowchart the existing contract management process.This process was not changed, but the methodfrom paper-based to web-based was. The processis shown on the left.

The contract management software develop-ment schedule was very tight. This was necessaryto have the system in place in time to support thetransition of over 200 tasks from the incumbentcontractor to the new contractor. The teamreproduced and electronically sent the respectiveproject offices each existing task order statementof work. As project offices usually assign aTechnical Representative (TR) for each task, the

TRs were asked to review the technical requirements and develop a minimum of three performance-basedmetrics for each follow-on task for the first six-month award fee period of the contract. The first webscreen developed by Linda Kenik was the Task Request Form (shown, next page). This screen requiresthat the project office provide the technical requirements and metrics used in determining the task awardfee rating. Project offices were notified via e-mail that task requests and modifications would only beaccepted through the new web-based system. The fact that the project offices could “cut and paste” fromthe electronically provided statement of work simplified the process for the customers.

However, with any change in process there is always some resistance. Numerous training sessionswere scheduled for both the government task representatives and the contractor supervisors and adminis-trative staff. System users were invited to suggest changes to the software which resulted in many

Winter 2003 page 13

changes from screen colors to page content, all to make the systemmore user friendly. Other adopted suggestions included electroni-cally routing each task request through the Office of Risk Manage-ment for advice on risk management provisions, adding usermanuals, and a “What’s New” screen (shown below).

By far the largest impact of implementing the Contract Man-agement System (CMS) was felt by the contractor who nowprovides far more details in cost estimates and task plan, within 10working days of receiving the task request. The Contractor TaskPlan (top, next page) is how the contractor communicates itsproposal to meet the government’s technical, schedule, and qualityrequirements. It details the number of hours necessary to performthe task and contains all job titles of personnel assigned to tasks.The contractor merely selects the appropriate job title, enters thedirect cost per hour, and estimates the number of hours. Uniquerequirements such as travel or equipment are also specified by thecontractor.

Each task plan submitted by the contractor is reviewed by the COTR/ACOTR and then forwarded to the TR thatrequested the task. If either the COTR or the TR disagrees with the proposed effort, it is returned to the contractor with anexplanation. When the technical content is agreed upon, the task is electronically forwarded to the Contracting Officer.

Mark Manthey, the CO for GESS, reviews the entire task order package on his PC and if acceptable, electronicallyapprove the task.

Another time savings feature of CMS is the Task Order Award Fee Evaluation Form (shown final graphic, next page).The TR receives an e-mail indicating that the evaluation form is on the web and needs to be completed. Only tasks belong-

ing to a specific evaluator are listed. Each taskincludes the unique metrics specified with theadjectival definitions. Typically 75 percent ofthe ratings are received within a week and nearlyall ratings are received with just one reminder.The paper evaluation form process took twice aslong.

Six weeks prior to the start of an award feeevaluation period, the TRs are asked to reviewthe task statements of work and make necessarychanges. A key to the success of CMS is thateach statement of work covers only one awardfee evaluation period. This requires the contrac-tor to review and update its planned training,travel, equipment, and milestones, even for on-going efforts. At this time the government alsoupdates its performance metrics.

CMS has offered many benefits over thepaper process. It makes communicating the government’s technical requirements far more efficient, keeps task amendmentssimple, and keeps cost estimates current. These enable project offices to more efficiently use their funds. When unforeseenevents occur, CMS also allows the contractor to quickly notify the government and insure that the proper funding is avail-able to maintain task performance if desired.

(continued on next page)

Just Got Easier

Winter 2003 page 14

Task OrdersContinuous improvement and flexibility are hallmarks of the software. Screens have been customized

to meet the needs of individual groups of users, such as the CO, COTR, TR, and contractor. Systemflexibility enabled the system to bemodified to bundle multiplefunding requests into a singlefunding action covering dozens oftasks, a necessity since the newSAP system is line item limited.

CMS lead software developerLinda Kenik states “CMS hastaken management of task ordercontracts into the electronic age.Where suspense files and inter-office mail took weeks or monthsto initiate a task, we now haveinstantaneous transmission ofdocuments between approvers,automatic archiving of documents,and considerable labor savings. Inspite of the complexity of theproject, it has been one of the mostenjoyable. The software hasdelivered tangible, measurable

savings in both time and cost.” Yes, CMS has exceeded the government’s request for a web-based tool totrack contract actions. It has evolved into a highly sophisticated, yet simple to use software, that alsomaintains critical contract data. Thomas Burke, GESS COTR, states, “We are still learning new ways to

utilize the data that CMS provides.We are able to customize ourAward Fee Evaluation Plan asnever before because CMS tracksand date stamps every action thattakes place. We have more insightinto the contractor’s performanceand the contractor is better able tofocus on those areas where weplace emphasis. CMS permits thecontract management team to spendless time on repetitive, administra-tion functions, allowing more timeto develop value-added processimprovements.”

(continued from previous page)

Winter 2003 page 15

the Potomac Elementary school as part of the NASA Outreach Program.The good news is I was invited to the festivities at the school.

Two local newspapers were present on December 2, 2002, as Mr.O’Keefe presented the school and Vernon with a collage of Flat Stanleysurrounded by patches, pins and a flight certification recognizing hisaccomplishment in outer space. The Administrator gave the kids arousing pep talk. At the conclusion of his talk, astronauts Leland Melvin and Sandra Magnus commencedtheir presentations. The astronauts showed slides of the shuttle (interior and exterior) and the spacestation. They discussed training, the speed the shuttle travels as it orbits the earth, and the need for thestudents to study all their subjects. Then they answered questions. Over 500 kids attended the assembly. Iwas surprised at the number of students that were familiar with the International Space Station and theShuttle.

Yes Flat Stanley did thank me for the opportunity of a lifetime.I enjoy encouraging young kids to perform their best in school. And the kids really respond. It is one

of the highest performing schools in that area. It is a rural area, too. It does not often see such big events.So everyone there was elated. If you have the time, I encourage you to help keep all youngsters focused onpreparing for tomorrow. I watched Vernon, now a third grader as he experienced all of this. He wasclearly cherishing a day he will never forget.

Flat Stanley(continued from page 5) N

ASA/

Bill I

ngal

ls

A Time Of Change At AmesBy Carolyn S. La Follette, Ames Research Center

Ames Research Center’s Acquisition Division has experienced several personnel changes over the lastseveral months. First of all, of course, Mr. Charles W. Duff II, Ames Procurement Officer, agreed toreturn to NASA Headquarters on a year’s detail to act as the Deputy Assistant Administrator for Procure-ment. His leaving had a domino effect on several of us. Ms. Connie L. Cunningham, the Deputy Procure-ment Officer, moved into Mr. Duff’s position as Procurement Officer. Ms. Carolyn S. La Follette perma-nently vacated her position as Chief, Acquisition Branch for Center Operations and Space and moved intothe Deputy Procurement Officer spot. That move resulted in an additional Branch Chief vacancy in thedivision, added to one caused by a retirement in 2001. On February 19, 2003, the Procurement Officerannounced the selection of the two new branch chiefs.

Mr. Gary L. Heagy has been selected as the Chief, Acquisition Branch for Business and Policy. Mr.Heagy joined NASA Ames in 2000 as a construction contract specialist, after having worked at the NavalFacilities Engineering Command in San Bruno, California for 19 years. Eleven of those years, he was asupervisor. During his tenure, he held both engineering and Contracting Officer positions. He has abachelor’s degree in civil engineering and an MBA. He enjoys sports and spends free time in familyevents, ferrying his children to sport and dance events.

Ms. Marie E. Dorish has been selected as the Chief, Acquisition Branch for Center Operations andSpace. Ms. Dorish has been at the center since 1989, most recently performing branch review duties aswell as being the center’s IFM purchasing lead. Her prior acquisition experience was at the NAVPROLockheed in Sunnyvale, California. Prior to her government service, she was an elementary schoolteacher. She holds a masters degree in procurement and contract management. In her spare time sheenjoys country western dancing and golf.

In addition to the above changes, Ms. Rosa Tonarelli returned to the Acquisition Division after anabsence of eight years working in the Commercial Technology Office. During her time there, she held thepositions of New Technology Representative and SBIR program manager for Ames. Ms. Tonarelli’scurrent position is the policy officer. Her prior experience in the division was as a Contracting Officer,working later in the business and policy branch. She came to Ames in 1989, after working in DCASPROFord Aerospace for several years. She loves her dogs, golf, and travel, especially to Hawaii with herhusband.

Administrator O’Keefe with Vernon andPrincipal DeBorah Bushrod

Winter 2003 page 16

Procurement Countdown is publishedby NASA’s Office of Procurement.

Editor................Susie Marucci (202) 358-1896susie.marucci@hq.nasa.gov

Procurement Countdown

Michael J. Ladomirak RetiresAfter 40 years of federal service, Mike Ladomirak retired on January 3, 2002. He began his

government career as a management intern at the Olmsted Air Force Base in Middletown, PA. Afterworking in computer programming and operations, budgeting, and procurement, he came to theGoddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) as a contract specialist.. A series of progressively more com-

plex contracting and management assignments in research and development, automaticdata processing equipment, centralized procurement, and program procurement, led tothe position of Associate Director for Acquisition in November 1994. He was respon-sible for planning, organizing, directing, and controlling the center’s procurementprogram activities. He also represented the center as the senior procurement official toHeadquarters, contractors, industrial organizations, universities, and state and localgovernments.

Mr. Ladomirak received numerous awards including the Presidential Rank ofMeritorious Executive in the Senior Executive Service, NASA Distinguished ServiceMedal, the NASA Medal for Outstanding Leadership, the GSFC Award of Merit, theGSFC Honor Award for Exceptional Achievement,and the GSFC Honor Award for Equal Opportunity.

Mr. Ladomirak once stated that his life goal is to enjoy lifewhile making a difference. He has surely made a difference at theGoddard Space Flight Center. He will be missed immensely as hepursues his interests and hobbies including woodworking, garden-ing, photography, travel, cooking, and continued education.