(Pub. L. 111–350, § 3,Jan. 4, 2011, 124 Stat. 3742.)
Historical and Revision Notes
| Revised Section
|| Source (U.S. Code)
|| Source (Statutes at Large)
|41:252(a) (words before 1st semicolon).
|June 30, 1949, ch. 288, title III, § 302(a), 63 Stat. 393; July 12, 1952, ch. 703, § 1(m), 66 Stat. 594; Pub. L. 85–800, § 1, Aug. 28, 1958, 72 Stat. 966; Pub. L. 89–343, § 1, Nov. 8, 1965, 79 Stat. 1303.
|June 30, 1949, ch. 288, title III, § 302A, as added Pub. L. 103–355, title IV, §§ 4003, 4103(a), Oct. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 3338, 3341.
|June 30, 1949, ch. 288, title III, § 302B, as added Pub. L. 103–355, title IV, § 4203(b), Oct. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 3346.
|41:252(a) (words after 1st semicolon and before “but when”).
|41:252(a) (words after “other law”).
|June 30, 1949, ch. 288, title III, § 310, 63 Stat. 397; July 12, 1952, ch. 703, § 1(m), (n), 66 Stat. 594; Pub. L. 85–800, § 6, Aug. 28, 1958, 72 Stat. 967; Pub. L. 89–343, § 5, Nov. 8, 1965, 79 Stat. 1303; Pub. L. 98–369, div. B, title VII, § 2714(a)(6), July 18, 1984, 98 Stat. 1185.
In subsection (c)(1)(B), the words “except as provided in paragraph (2)” are added for clarity. The words “section
or any other” are omitted as unnecessary.
Ex. Ord. No. 13005. Empowerment Contracting
Ex. Ord. No. 13005, May 21, 1996, 61
In order to promote economy and efficiency in Federal procurement, it is necessary to secure broad-based competition for Federal contracts. This broad competition is best achieved where there is an expansive pool of potential contractors capable of producing quality goods and services at competitive prices. A great and largely untapped opportunity for expanding the pool of such contractors can be found in this Nation’s economically distressed communities.
Fostering growth of Federal contractors in economically distressed communities and ensuring that those contractors become viable businesses for the long term will promote economy and efficiency in Federal procurement and help to empower those communities. Fostering growth of long-term viable contractors will be promoted by offering appropriate incentives to qualified businesses.
Accordingly, by the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, including section
486(a) [now 121(a)] of title 40, United States Code, and section
, United States Code, it is hereby ordered as follows:
Section 1. Policy. The purpose of this order is to strengthen the economy and to improve the efficiency of the Federal procurement system by encouraging business development that expands the industrial base and increases competition.
Sec. 2. Empowerment Contracting Program. In consultation with the Secretaries of the Departments of Housing and Urban Development, Labor, and Defense; the Administrator of General Services; the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration; the Administrator of the Small Business Administration; and the Administrator for Federal Procurement Policy, the Secretary of the Department of Commerce shall develop policies and procedures to ensure that agencies, to the extent permitted by law, grant qualified large businesses and qualified small businesses appropriate incentives to encourage business activity in areas of general economic distress, including a price or an evaluation credit, when assessing offers for government contracts in unrestricted competitions, where the incentives would promote the policy set forth in this order. In developing such policies and procedures, the Secretary shall consider the size of the qualified businesses.
Sec. 3. Monitoring and Evaluation. The Secretary shall:
(a) monitor the implementation and operation of the policies and procedures developed in accordance with this order;
(b) develop a process to ensure the proper administration of the program and to reduce the potential for fraud by the intended beneficiaries of the program;
(c) develop principles and a process to evaluate the effectiveness of the policies and procedures developed in accordance with this order; and
(d) by December 1 of each year, issue a report to the President on the status and effectiveness of the program.
Sec. 4. Implementation Guidelines. In implementing this order, the Secretary shall:
(a) issue rules, regulations, and guidelines necessary to implement this order, including a requirement for the periodic review of the eligibility of qualified businesses and distressed areas;
(b) draft all rules, regulations, and guidelines necessary to implement this order within 90 days of the date of this order; and
(c) ensure that all policies and procedures and all rules, regulations, and guidelines adopted and implemented in accordance with this order minimize the administrative burden on affected agencies and the procurement process.
Sec. 5. Definitions. For purposes of this Executive order:
(a) “Agency” means any authority of the United States that is an “agency” under 44
, other than those considered to be independent regulatory agencies, as defined in 44
(b) “Area of general economic distress” shall be defined, for all urban and rural communities, as any census tract that has a poverty rate of at least 20 percent or any designated Federal Empowerment Zone, Supplemental Empowerment Zone, Enhanced Enterprise Community, or Enterprise Community. In addition, the Secretary may designate as an area of general economic distress any additional rural or Indian reservation area after considering the following factors:
(1) Unemployment rate;
(2) Degree of poverty;
(3) Extent of outmigration; and
(4) Rate of business formation and rate of business growth.
(c) “Qualified large business” means a large for-profit or not-for-profit trade or business that (1) employs a significant number of residents from the area of general economic distress; and (2) either has a significant physical presence in the area of general economic distress or has a direct impact on generating significant economic activity in the area of general economic distress.
(d) “Qualified small business” means a small for-profit or not-for-profit trade or business that (1) employs a significant number of residents from the area of general economic distress; (2) has a significant physical presence in the area of general economic distress; or (3) has a direct impact on generating significant economic activity in the area of general economic distress.
(e) “Secretary” means the Secretary of Commerce.
Sec. 6. Agency Authority. Nothing in this Executive order shall be construed as displacing the agencies’ authority or responsibilities, as authorized by law, including specifically other programs designed to promote the development of small or disadvantaged businesses.
Sec. 7. Judicial Review. This Executive order does not create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or equity by a party against the United States, its agencies or instrumentalities, its officers or employees, or any other person.
William J. Clinton.
Memorandum of President of the United States, Mar. 4, 2009, 74
Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies
The Federal Government has an overriding obligation to American taxpayers. It should perform its functions efficiently and effectively while ensuring that its actions result in the best value for the taxpayers.
Since 2001, spending on Government contracts has more than doubled, reaching over $500 billion in 2008. During this same period, there has been a significant increase in the dollars awarded without full and open competition and an increase in the dollars obligated through cost-reimbursement contracts. Between fiscal years 2000 and 2008, for example, dollars obligated under cost-reimbursement contracts nearly doubled, from $71 billion in 2000 to $135 billion in 2008. Reversing these trends away from full and open competition and toward cost-reimbursement contracts could result in savings of billions of dollars each year for the American taxpayer.
Excessive reliance by executive agencies on sole-source contracts (or contracts with a limited number of sources) and cost-reimbursement contracts creates a risk that taxpayer funds will be spent on contracts that are wasteful, inefficient, subject to misuse, or otherwise not well designed to serve the needs of the Federal Government or the interests of the American taxpayer. Reports by agency Inspectors General, the Government Accountability Office (GAO), and other independent reviewing bodies have shown that noncompetitive and cost-reimbursement contracts have been misused, resulting in wasted taxpayer resources, poor contractor performance, and inadequate accountability for results.
When awarding Government contracts, the Federal Government must strive for an open and competitive process. However, executive agencies must have the flexibility to tailor contracts to carry out their missions and achieve the policy goals of the Government. In certain exigent circumstances, agencies may need to consider whether a competitive process will not accomplish the agency’s mission. In such cases, the agency must ensure that the risks associated with noncompetitive contracts are minimized.
Moreover, it is essential that the Federal Government have the capacity to carry out robust and thorough management and oversight of its contracts in order to achieve programmatic goals, avoid significant overcharges, and curb wasteful spending. A GAO study last year of 95 major defense acquisitions projects found cost overruns of 26 percent, totaling $295 billion over the life of the projects. Improved contract oversight could reduce such sums significantly.
Government outsourcing for services also raises special concerns. For decades, the Federal Government has relied on the private sector for necessary commercial services used by the Government, such as transportation, food, and maintenance. Office of Management and Budget Circular A–76, first issued in 1966, was based on the reasonable premise that while inherently governmental activities should be performed by Government employees, taxpayers may receive more value for their dollars if non-inherently governmental activities that can be provided commercially are subject to the forces of competition.
However, the line between inherently governmental activities that should not be outsourced and commercial activities that may be subject to private sector competition has been blurred and inadequately defined. As a result, contractors may be performing inherently governmental functions. Agencies and departments must operate under clear rules prescribing when outsourcing is and is not appropriate.
It is the policy of the Federal Government that executive agencies shall not engage in noncompetitive contracts except in those circumstances where their use can be fully justified and where appropriate safeguards have been put in place to protect the taxpayer. In addition, there shall be a preference for fixed-price type contracts. Cost-reimbursement contracts shall be used only when circumstances do not allow the agency to define its requirements sufficiently to allow for a fixed-price type contract. Moreover, the Federal Government shall ensure that taxpayer dollars are not spent on contracts that are wasteful, inefficient, subject to misuse, or otherwise not well designed to serve the Federal Government’s needs and to manage the risk associated with the goods and services being procured. The Federal Government must have sufficient capacity to manage and oversee the contracting process from start to finish, so as to ensure that taxpayer funds are spent wisely and are not subject to excessive risk. Finally, the Federal Government must ensure that those functions that are inherently governmental in nature are performed by executive agencies and are not outsourced.
I hereby direct the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), in collaboration with the Secretary of Defense, the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the Administrator of General Services, the Director of the Office of Personnel Management, and the heads of such other agencies as the Director of OMB determines to be appropriate, and with the participation of appropriate management councils and program management officials, to develop and issue by July 1, 2009, Government-wide guidance to assist agencies in reviewing, and creating processes for ongoing review of, existing contracts in order to identify contracts that are wasteful, inefficient, or not otherwise likely to meet the agency’s needs, and to formulate appropriate corrective action in a timely manner. Such corrective action may include modifying or canceling such contracts in a manner and to the extent consistent with applicable laws, regulations, and policy.
I further direct the Director of OMB, in collaboration with the aforementioned officials and councils, and with input from the public, to develop and issue by September 30, 2009, Government-wide guidance to:
(1) govern the appropriate use and oversight of sole-source and other types of noncompetitive contracts and to maximize the use of full and open competition and other competitive procurement processes;
(2) govern the appropriate use and oversight of all contract types, in full consideration of the agency’s needs, and to minimize risk and maximize the value of Government contracts generally, consistent with the regulations to be promulgated pursuant to section 864 ofPublic Law 110–417;
(3) assist agencies in assessing the capacity and ability of the Federal acquisition workforce to develop, manage, and oversee acquisitions appropriately; and
(4) clarify when governmental outsourcing for services is and is not appropriate, consistent with section 321 ofPublic Law 110–417 (31
U.S.C. 501 note
Executive departments and agencies shall carry out the provisions of this memorandum to the extent permitted by law. This memorandum is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
The Director of OMB is hereby authorized and directed to publish this memorandum in the Federal Register.