{
  "id": "R41209",
  "type": "CRS Report",
  "typeId": "REPORTS",
  "number": "R41209",
  "active": false,
  "source": "EveryCRSReport.com, University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department",
  "versions": [
    {
      "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
      "id": 375393,
      "date": "2011-01-03",
      "retrieved": "2016-04-07T01:16:24.277991",
      "title": "Inherently Governmental Functions and Other Work Reserved for Performance by Federal Government Employees: The Obama Administration\u2019s Proposed Policy Letter",
      "summary": "On March 31, 2010, the Office of Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP) in the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issued a proposed policy letter on inherently governmental functions and other \u201cwork reserved for performance by federal government employees.\u201d While not final, the policy letter represents the Obama Administration\u2019s proposed guidance for agencies determining (1) whether particular functions are inherently governmental and (2) when functions closely associated with the performance of inherently governmental functions and critical functions should be performed by government personnel. Under existing law, agencies cannot contract out inherently governmental functions, and they must give \u201cspecial consideration\u201d to using government personnel in performing functions closely associated with the performance of inherently governmental functions. No limitations upon contracting out critical functions currently exist. \nIn keeping with the requirements of Section 321 of the Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for FY2009 (P.L. 110-417), which tasked OMB with developing a \u201csingle consistent definition\u201d of \u201cinherently governmental function,\u201d the proposed policy letter adopts the definition of the Federal Activities Inventory Reform (FAIR) Act. The FAIR Act defines an \u201cinherently governmental function\u201d as one that is \u201cso intimately related to the public interest as to require performance by Federal Government employees.\u201d However, neither the proposed policy letter nor the notice from OFPP introducing it indicates whether or how the Obama Administration would amend the definitions of \u201cinherently governmental function\u201d in the Federal Acquisition Regulation, OMB Circular A-76, or other executive branch regulations and policy documents. \nThe proposed policy letter defines a \u201ccritical function\u201d as one that is \u201cnecessary to the agency being able to effectively perform and maintain control of its mission and operations.\u201d This definition, and the accompanying guidance on when critical functions and functions associated with the performance of inherently governmental functions should be performed in-house, also respond to the requirements of Section 321 of the Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act. Among other things, Section 321 tasked OMB with developing criteria that agencies could use in identifying critical functions and positions that should be performed by government personnel to ensure that agencies develop and maintain \u201csufficient organic expertise and technical capacity.\u201d President Obama\u2019s March 4, 2009, memorandum on government contracting similarly charged OMB with clarifying when outsourcing is \u201cappropriate.\u201d \nThe proposed policy letter raises several legal and policy issues of potential interest to Congress, given recently enacted and proposed legislation regarding inherently governmental functions and other limitations upon contracting out (e.g., P.L. 111-8, P.L. 111-84, P.L. 111-117). Key among these issues are (1) the relationship between the proposed policy letter and other executive branch authorities on inherently governmental and related functions; (2) whether the proposed policy letter would necessarily result in changes in agencies\u2019 use of contractors to perform certain functions that some Members of Congress and commentators claim are inherently governmental (e.g., security services during contingency operations); and (3) the potential demands of any new requirements upon the acquisition workforce.\nThe Office of Federal Procurement Policy has reportedly indicated that a final policy letter will be released \u201cin early 2011.\u201d",
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORTS",
      "active": false,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "encoding": "utf-8",
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R41209",
          "sha1": "681181a99b7947ed29907104a97743d37f1a8e43",
          "filename": "files/20110103_R41209_681181a99b7947ed29907104a97743d37f1a8e43.html",
          "images": null
        },
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "encoding": null,
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R41209",
          "sha1": "1e7519c2626717c747b5cf8d5061dbe336939226",
          "filename": "files/20110103_R41209_1e7519c2626717c747b5cf8d5061dbe336939226.pdf",
          "images": null
        }
      ],
      "topics": []
    },
    {
      "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department",
      "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc809044/",
      "id": "R41209_2010Oct01",
      "date": "2010-10-01",
      "retrieved": "2016-03-19T13:57:26",
      "title": "Inherently Governmental Functions and Other Work Reserved for Performance by Federal Government Employees: The Obama Administration\u2019s Proposed Policy Letter",
      "summary": null,
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORT",
      "active": false,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "filename": "files/20101001_R41209_ffd661a6c36e9504ac91c634d121d14befaaeec2.pdf"
        },
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "filename": "files/20101001_R41209_ffd661a6c36e9504ac91c634d121d14befaaeec2.html"
        }
      ],
      "topics": []
    }
  ],
  "topics": [
    "National Defense"
  ]
}