1. Overview of the Executive Order

• Issued by President Trump on March 20, 2025, titled “Eliminating Waste and Saving Taxpayer Dollars by Consolidating Procurement.”
• Aims to centralize domestic federal procurement of common goods and services under the General Services Administration (GSA).
• Seeks to eliminate fragmented procurement processes (contract vehicles) across federal agencies.

2. Definition of Common Goods and Services

• Defined by the Category Management Leadership Council under the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
• Covers ten (10) procurement categories, including:
  • • Information Technology
    • Professional Services
    • Security and Protection
    • Facilities and Construction
    • Industrial Products and Services
    • Office Management
    • Transportation and Logistics
    • Travel
    • Human Capital
    • Medical Supplies and Services

3. Implementation Plan and Agency Responsibilities

• Agencies must submit transition plans to GSA within 60 days (by May 19, 2025).
• GSA must develop a full procurement consolidation plan within 90 days (by June 18, 2025).
• Agencies will be required to use GSA contracts instead of their own for common goods and services.

4. Expected Benefits of Consolidation

• Cost savings: By consolidating procurement, the government expects to reduce redundant spending and negotiate better bulk pricing.
• Increased efficiency: Centralized purchasing is intended to streamline acquisition processes and improve contract management.
• Greater standardization: Agencies will follow uniform procurement standards, improving accountability and transparency.
• Reduction of contract duplication: The executive order aims to prevent agencies from running separate contracts for the same goods/services.

5. Concerns and Potential Drawbacks

• Innovation concerns: Critics argue that centralization may limit vendor competition and discourage new, innovative solutions from emerging.
• Small business impact:
  • • Federal agencies often set aside contracts for small and minority-owned businesses—consolidation could reduce these opportunities.
    • Large-scale GSA contracts might favor bigger firms, making it harder for smaller businesses to compete.
• Reduced agency autonomy:
  • • Agencies that previously managed their own procurement (e.g., NASA, NIH) may lose control over decision-making.
    • The shift to GSA procurement could slow down specialized or urgent purchases unique to each agency.
• Timing
  • • If implemented according to the proposed schedule, changes will occur during the peak government buying season further complicating a smooth transition

6. Impact on Existing Contracts

• Agencies currently using Government-Wide Acquisition Contracts (GWACs)—like NASA’s SEWP or NIH’s CIO-SP—might have to shift to GSA contracts.
• Contracts that don’t fit into GSA’s structure may face delays or cancellation.
• Long-term government suppliers might need to adjust to new GSA procurement standards.

7. Industry Reactions

• Supporters (typically large contractors and procurement efficiency advocates) believe this move will drive cost savings and improve federal spending transparency.
• Critics (especially small business owners and agencies with specialized needs) argue that it could stifle competition, limit innovation, and complicate procurement for non-standardized needs.

8. Future Considerations

• Agencies accustomed to using their own contract vehicles will most certainly resist this consolidation effort. 
• Congressional Oversight: Lawmakers may introduce modifications or exemptions for certain agencies.
• Potential Policy Changes in 2025 Elections: If a new administration takes office, they might revise or revoke this policy.

GSA’s Scalability: Questions remain about whether GSA has the capacity to handle the increased volume of procurement under its control.