GSA Expands TDR Program

Transaction Data Reporting (TDR) is a pilot program that GSA began in 2016.  GSA’s latest program modification expands TDR in a way certain to make many schedule holders happy.  This program is not without critics, however, including GSA’s own Inspector General (IG).

History of the TDR Program

GSA began the TDR program through the promulgation of an acquisition rule in 2016.  The rule was intended to phase out the then existing requirements for Commercial Sales Practices (CSP) disclosures and Price Reductions Clause (PRC) monitoring.  GSA characterized the rule as “the most significant change to the Schedules program in the past two decades.”

The intent of the TDR program was to build up enough information on how the government purchases goods that the government could meet its goal of fair and reasonable pricing without requiring CSP and PRC, which one commenter characterized as “pillars of an outdated 1980s multiple awards schedule pricing policy.”  This information would help both in negotiations up front and when agencies were looking to actually acquire goods and services.

Initially, TDR was mandatory for new offerors whose contracts included the relevant Special Item Numbers (SINs).  In 2017, GSA decided to make participation in TDR voluntary for everyone with the appropriate SINs.  The press release around this change noted that the evaluation period for the TDR program was intended to be three years.  It also provided metrics on how GSA would evaluate the program.

TDR Controversy

While popular with GSA Schedule holders, the TDR pilot has had an enemy since day 1:  The GSA IG.  The IG regularly releases reports with conclusions like “GSA’s transformational contract pricing pilot is plagued with inaccurate and unreliable data.”  It has published at least six reports since 2015 on TDR, with three in 2022.  Whenever GSA issues a report on the pilot program, the IG attacks the report’s accuracy.  For instance, in response to GSA’s report on the 2020 fiscal year (which was published in 2021), the IG claimed that the “GSA has amassed a collection of data that is almost entirely inaccurate, unreliable and unusable.”  Several of the IG complaints fall into two categories: either the data is inaccurate or the data isn’t standardized enough to make comparisons.  So why hasn’t the IG stepped in to improve the process instead of just criticizing it?

The PRC and required compliance programs, as well as its impact on commercial discounting practices, is one of, if not the biggest barriers to entry to the GSA Schedule.  It also allows the IG to highlight enormous savings through its investigations through PRC violations.  Removing PRC also eliminates some of the most significant rationale for pre- and post-award audits.  This may explain some of the IG’s hostility to the program.

Newest Mod Expands TSA

GSA has rolled modification 22 to the GSA Schedule solicitation.  Like most such modifications, it includes changes to the solicitation instructions for several SINs, as well as other housekeeping issues that have built up since the last revision.

Of more consequence, however, is the expansion of the TDR program.  GSA is adding 67 additional SINs to TDR in the Furniture & Furnishings, Industrial Products & Services, Miscellaneous, Office Management, Scientific Management and Solutions, Security and Protection, and Transportation & Logistics Services large categories.

Expanding TDR is of benefit to GSA Schedule holders, who now have more options on how they structure their offerings.  It should benefit GSA and ordering agencies, as they will have more information available for their purchasing decision.  The change is not without controversy, which will continue to slow down complete TDR adoption.