This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Has past performance exceeded a threshold? Are the supplier’s 3rd party risk ratings acceptable? Assessing Risk across the Supply Chain. How to properly assess risk is itself a complex topic which I can barely scratch the surface of here. Has a supplier provided relevant certifications (.i.e.
Margaret Boatner, deputy assistant secretary of the Army for strategy and acquisition reform “We are targeting a couple of really key processes like our test and evaluation processes, and importantly, our cybersecurity processes. We really condensed down the entire riskmanagement framework (RMF) process to six critical controls,” he said. “On
And experts said merely withdrawing the technical assessment, which the Navy’s Program Executive Office for Manpower, Logistics and Business Solutions (PEO-MLB) asked for as part of its riskmanagement strategy, doesn’t offset the critical findings. Those are the three most common evaluation criteria,” he said.
Seasoned practitioners in public procurement can be jaded from situations that have gone wrong, and it is common for inexperienced public buyers to experience risk aversion and fear of the unknown. Additionally, a simplistic risk transfer strategy may reduce market interest, and the number of bids submitted.
A checklist guide to getting the most out of your supplier riskmanagement program. This reliance can increase supplier risk or uncover a large source of value and supplier innovation for organizations. . The following are some of the most common objectives for implementing a supplier risk and performance management program. .
I think we recently saw an article that we crossed $100 billion a year market share threshold, which was somewhat unheard of just even a few years ago, but it’s all due to an unknown. New products and capabilities are coming to market like AI and machine learning, and we also have new risks that are emerging.
Williams, and Mickey Liebner; Mayer Brown Bipartisan, bicameral legislation in the US Congress would mandate the use of the National Institute of Standards and Technology’s (“NIST”) Artificial Intelligence RiskManagement Framework (“Framework”) by federal agencies. Register now by clicking here.
Williams, and Mickey Liebner; Mayer Brown Bipartisan, bicameral legislation in the US Congress would mandate the use of the National Institute of Standards and Technology’s (“NIST”) Artificial Intelligence RiskManagement Framework (“Framework”) by federal agencies.
The document, officially titled “Incident Response Recommendations and Considerations for Cybersecurity RiskManagement: A CSF 2.0 The new draft guidance also shifts the focus away from “detecting, analyzing, prioritizing, and handling incidents” to incorporating incident response into overall cybersecurity riskmanagement activities.
For procurements exceeding specified thresholds, justification must document the effort to find alternative suppliers, listing unique technical requirements and companies contacted. This involves documenting the evaluation of potential alternative supplies and explaining why they could not satisfy the requirements.
Offerors with more than one certification did not receive extra points or receive an evaluation preference, they simply had an inherent advantage under the experience and past performance subfactor, which was not prohibited by SBA’s regulation. [2] The proposed changes to the DFARS are primarily to: Add references to the CMMC 2.0
In addition, he will provide updates on the RiskManagement Framework (RMF) and Authority to Operate (ATO) processes as part of the integration of technology in delivering best value healthcare. Entities that meet certain threshold criteria – regardless of size – are covered by the rule. What needs to be reported?
For bulk sensitive personal data, there is a yet-to-be-determined volume threshold that must be involved in the transaction for it to be covered. Suggested thresholds in the ANPRM range from data sets on 100 U.S. Government-related data, there is no threshold requirement and the data categories will be covered regardless of volume.
PAP 2021-05, Evaluation of FSS Program Pricing, is one such example. This PAP fundamentally alters the MAS negotiation process, establishing evaluation standards, requirements, and procedures not found in the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) or the General Services Acquisition Regulation (GSAR).
Section 2(g) refers to AI riskmanagement, and states that It is important to manage the risks from the Federal Government’s own use of AI and increase its internal capacity to regulate, govern, and support responsible use of AI to deliver better results for Americans. Section 10.1(b) Section 10.1(b) Section 10.1(b)
FAR & Beyond: Thoughts on “What is Fair and Reasonable? Federal Acquisition Policy and Procedure (PAP) 2021-05, Evaluation of FSS Program Pricing , sets forth “comprehensive guidance regarding the evaluation of pricing throughout the life of a Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) program contract.”
As GSA’s Transactional Data Reporting (TDR) and price evaluation tools expand across the Multiple Award Schedule (MAS) program, tracking key terms and conditions and their impact on price will be vital to what is “fair and reasonable.” million or $7 million for orders with a manufacturing NAICS code).
As CISA has noted , [an SBOM] has emerged as a key building block in software security and software supply chain riskmanagement. The solicitation further provided that an offeror could receive credit for a scored evaluation element by using the resources of an affiliate if there was a meaningful commitment letter.
There is no exception for contracts below the simplified acquisition threshold, for commercial products and services, or for commercially available off-the-shelf (COTS) products. Submit Your Feedback on Draft FedRAMP Memo The Coalition will be submitting comments on the Office of Management and Budget’s draft FedRAMP memo.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 5,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content