Overseas Civilian Contractors

News and issues relating to Civilian Contractors working Overseas

The Unknown Military Veteran Civilian Contractor War Casualties

They too are the

BEST KEPT SECRET OF THE WARS

The Majority of ExPat Civilian Contractor Casualties first served their country in the military.  

Many of them gave twenty and more years of service before deploying in a civilian capacity.

Many of them were buried with military honors.

Yet we are not supposed to know their names or even that they died in our wars.

Defense Base Act War Profiteers are encouraged to abuse the families they leave behind

You can see some of these nameless hero’s at

Our Fallen Contractors Memorial

Please keep them and their  families in your thoughts today and everyday

May 28, 2012 Posted by | Civilian Contractors, Contingency Contracting, Contractor Casualties, Defense Base Act, ExPats, Friendly Fire, Veterans, Wartime Contracting | , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

America’s Shame: The U.S. Government’s Human Trafficking Dilemma

Project on Government Oversight  May 7, 2012

For Vinnie Tuivaga, the offer was the answer to a prayer: A job in a luxury hotel in Dubai–the so-called Las Vegas of the Persian Gulf–making five times what she was earning as a hair stylist in her native Fiji.

She jumped at the chance, even if it meant paying an upfront commission to the recruiter.

You probably know how this story is going to end. There was no high-paying job, luxury location or easy work.

Tuivaga and other Fijians ended up in Iraq where they lived in shipping containers and existed in what amounted to indentured servitude.

Journalist Sarah Stillman told Tuivaga’s story and that of tens of thousands of other foreign workers in acute detail almost a year ago in her New Yorker piece, “The Invisible Army.”

In some cases, Stillman found more severe abuses and more squalid living conditions than what Tuivaga and her fellow Fijians experienced.

But like Tuivaga, thousands of foreign nationals in the U.S. government’s invisible army ended up in Iraq and Afghanistan war zones because they fell victim to human traffickers.

Let that sink in.

This human trafficking pipeline wasn’t benefitting some shadowy war lord or oppressive regime. No, these are workers who were feeding, cleaning up after, and providing logistical support for U.S. troops—the standard-bearers of the free and democratic world.

In its final report to Congress last year, the Commission on Wartime Contracting said it had uncovered evidence of human trafficking in Iraq and Afghanistan by labor brokers and subcontractors. Commissioner Dov Zakheim later told a Senate panel that the Commission had only scratched the surface of the problem. He called it the “tip of the iceberg.”

In essence, despite a 2002 presidential directive that set a “zero tolerance” on human trafficking, modern-day slavers have been operating with impunity under the aegis of the U.S. government.

Nick Schwellenbach, who until last month was the director of investigations at the Project On Government Oversight (POGO), and author David Isenberg also wrote about the conditions some of these foreign workers endured in Iraq.

Nick and David uncovered documents that showed how one U.S. contractor—in this case KBR—was well aware that one of its subcontractors, Najlaa International Catering Services, was involved in trafficking abuses.

Please see the original and read more here

May 7, 2012 Posted by | Afghanistan, Civilian Contractors, Contingency Contracting, Contractor Corruption, Contractor Oversight, Follow the Money, Halliburton, Human Trafficking, Iraq, KBR, Politics | , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

SIGIR Quarterly Report April 2012

Special Investigator General for Iraq Reconstruction

Quarterly Report to US Congress

April 2012

Click here to view report at SIGIR site

April 30, 2012 Posted by | Civilian Contractors, Contingency Contracting, Contractor Corruption, Contractor Oversight, Department of Defense, Iraq, Legal Jurisdictions, SIGIR | , , , , | Leave a comment

SIGAR Report Finds Afghanistan Reconstruction Compromised By Security, Corruption

Dan Froomkin Huffington Post  April 30, 2012

An Afghan private security man, part of a private security company called Arya stands guard outside of a guest house in Herat west of Kabul, Afghanistan, Feb. 8, 2012. The push by Afghanistan's president to nationalize legions of private security guards before the end of March is putting multibillion-dollar aid projects in jeopardy and creating a shaky structure ripe for corruption and abuse, according to companies trying to make the switch.(AP Photo/Hoshang Hashimi)

WASHINGTON — Afghan reconstruction efforts remain severely hampered even after nearly $100 billion in spending over the last 10 years, according to a new watchdog report. The most immediate challenge seems to stem from the insistence by Afghanistan’s government that the private army of hired guns providing security for ongoing projects be replaced with Afghan locals, who do not appear to be up to the job, the report noted.

The latest quarterly report from the Special Inspector General for Afghan Reconstruction (or SIGAR) released on Monday also chronicles how corruption in the country shows no signs of having let up.

The report’s most urgent warning concerns the “imminent transition” from private security contractors (PSC) to the state-owned Afghan Public Protection Force.

Steven J. Trent, the acting special inspector general, expressed concerns that as many as 29 major USAID projects costing nearly $1.5 billion are at risk of full or partial termination “if the APPF cannot provide the needed security.” About half that amount has already been spent.

And whether it can is very much an open question, Trent wrote. The U.S. embassy, the Afghan government and the U.S.-led military forces agreed a year ago to check the progress of the Afghan Public Protection Force at the 6-, 9-, and 12-month marks.

“The 6-month assessment, completed in September 2011, found that the APPF was not ready to assume any of the essential PSC responsibilities to meet contract requirements — such as training, equipping, and deploying guard forces,” the report pointed out. “[T]he December assessment, which would have been at the 9-month mark, has not yet been made public” and “the deadline for the 12-month assessment has passed.”

April 30, 2012 Posted by | Afghanistan, Civilian Contractors, Contingency Contracting, Contract Awards, Contract Solicitations, Contractor Corruption, Contractor Oversight, Contracts Awarded, Department of Defense, ISAF, SIGAR | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

SIGAR April 30, 2012 Quarterly Report to the US Congress

SIGAR  Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction

Quarterly Report to the US Congress

April 30, 2012

Click here for PDF at SIGAR Site

April 30, 2012 Posted by | Afghanistan, Civilian Contractors, Contingency Contracting, Contractor Corruption, Contractor Oversight, Department of Defense, ISAF, Legal Jurisdictions, Private Military Contractors, Private Security Contractor, Safety and Security Issues, SIGAR | , , , | Leave a comment

The Comprehensive Contingency Contracting Reform Act of 2012

US Department of State  April 17, 2012

Testimony

Patrick F. Kennedy
Under Secretary for Management
Statement before the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, Subcommittee on Contracting Oversight
Washington, DC
April 17, 2012
Good morning Chairman McCaskill, Senator Portman, and distinguished members of the subcommittee. Thank you for your invitation to appear here today to discuss Senate bill 2139, the Comprehensive Contingency Contracting Reform Act of 2012.
See the video here

We share the Committee’s desire to ensure that efforts continue to strengthen contingency contracting. S. 2139 raises a number of important issues. While our review of the bill is ongoing, we welcome the opportunity to discuss our initial views on the bill’s provisions.

We understand that this legislation builds on the recommendations of the Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan – an independent, bipartisan panel that you, Senator McCaskill, created along with Senator Webb in 2007. The State Department worked continuously with the Commission on Wartime Contracting (CWC) from when it was formed in early 2008 until it sunset last August, and gained valuable insight from the Commission’s efforts. We have taken many steps to improve our contingency contracting over the past several years, based on the CWC’s reports, recommendations from other oversight entities, and our own lessons learned.

Read the transcript or view the video here

April 17, 2012 Posted by | Civilian Contractors, Contingency Contracting, Contractor Oversight, State Department | , , , , , | 1 Comment

GAO Finds Pentagon Still Can’t Keep Track of Its Contractors

By NEIL GORDON at POGO  April 10, 2012

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) has released the second of three annual reviews of Department of Defense (DoD) service contract inventories. As you know, POGO has repeatedly called for the government to improve the quality of these annual inventories, which are crucial for determining the true size and cost-effectiveness of the federal service contractor workforce and whether contractors are performing inherently governmental functions.

According to the GAO, DoD spent $204 billion on service contracts in fiscal year 2010. DoD relies on contractors to perform a wide variety of services, including professional and management support, information technology, and weapon system and intelligence functions.

The GAO reported that DoD has made a number of changes to improve the utility of the FY 2010 inventory, such as centrally preparing contract data to provide greater consistency among DoD components and increasing the level of detail on the services provided. However, the GAO found a number of problems that continue to limit the utility, accuracy, and completeness of inventories. DoD, to its credit, is making progress, but it does not expect to fully meet statutory requirements until FY 2016.

In the meantime, the shortcomings in DoD’s systems for compiling and reviewing inventories leave contractors free to run amok. According to the GAO, Army and Air Force inventory reviews identified 1,935 and 91 instances, respectively, in which contractors were performing inherently governmental functions. These are functions which, by law, must be performed by federal government employees.

For example, the GAO found 26 instances of Army contractors performing the inherently governmental function of Systems Coordinator, a position that involves representing program managers at meetings, acting as a liaison with Congress, and writing background papers for military staff. In another example, the entire police force at U.S. Army Kwajalein Atoll in the Marshall Islands (pictured above) was made up of 47 contractors patrolling, issuing citations, making arrests, and investigating misdemeanors. (Check the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) subpart listing examples of inherently governmental functions, and the first one you’ll see is “the direct conduct of criminal investigations.”)

Please see the original and read more here

April 11, 2012 Posted by | Civilian Contractors, Contingency Contracting, Contractor Oversight, Department of Defense, Government Contractor | , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Private Security Contractor Afghanistan RFP

Solicitation Number:
H92237-12-R-0041
Notice Type:
Combined Synopsis/Solicitation
Synopsis:
Added: Nov 29, 2011 1:08 pm

***ONLY CONTRACTORS THAT HOLD A CURRENT AFGHANISTAN MINISTRY OF INTERIOR PERSONAL SECURITY LICENSE AND ARE LICENSED / REGISTERED WITH THE AFGHANISTAN MINISTRY OF TRADE WILL BE CONSIDERED FOR AWARD, OFFERORS WHO DO NOT POSSESS THESE QUALIFICATIONS ARE RESPECTFULLY ASKED TO NOT RESPOND TO THIS REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL***
The CJSOTF-A Contracting Office, Camp Vance, Afghanistan is hereby issuing a combined synopsis/solicitation for Private Security Guard services for FLE Sar-e- Pul, Afghanistan in accordance with the attached SF 1449 and Statement of Work.
This is a combined synopsis/solicitation for commercial services prepared in accordance with the format in FAR Subpart 12.6, as supplemented with additional information included in this notice. This announcement constitutes the only solicitation; proposals are being requested and a written solicitation will not be issued.
The solicitation number for this requirement is H92237-12-R-0041, and this solicitation is being issued as a Request for Proposal (RFP).
The solicitation document and incorporate provisions and clauses included are those in effect through Federal Acquisition Circular 2005-53.
This requirement is unrestricted under NAICS code 561612 and is the Small Business Competitive Demonstration Program is not applicable.
A list of contract line item number(s) and items, quantities and units of measure (including options); a description of requirements for the items to be acquired; dates and places of delivery and acceptance and FOB point; applicable clauses; and the offer due date, time, and location are located in the attached SF1449 and Statement of Work.
The anticipated award date in response to this solicitation is anticipated 11 Dec 2011 and the point of contact for this requirement is LT Dominic Raigoza, email: cjsotfa.ko02@gmail.com (no commercial phone available).

Please see the original with links to documents at FedBiz Ops

November 29, 2011 Posted by | Afghanistan, Civilian Contractors, Contingency Contracting, Contract Solicitations, Private Security Contractor | , , , , | Leave a comment

Two Senators Send Letter To Unseal Wartime Contracting Commission Records

Cross Posted from MsSparky

Jake Wiens – (POGO) – November 10, 2011 – In an encouraging development, the two Senators—Jim Webb (D-VA) and Claire McCaskill (D-MO)—responsible for introducing legislation that created the sent a letter yesterday which called on the Archivist to “take immediate steps” to publicly disclose the Commission’s records, which had been sealed for 20 years. In a recent blog post, POGO called on the Congress to take action to lift this seal.

The full text of the letter is below:

November 7, 2011

Mr.
Archivist of the United States

700 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20408

Dear Mr. Ferriero:

We are writing to request that you take immediate steps to publicly release the permanent records of the Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan (the Commission), consistent with your authority under the law.

On September 30, 2011, the Commission terminated operations pursuant to statute and forwarded to the National Archives and Records Administration all records within its control not previously released to the public. In its letter of September 9, 2011, the Commission encouraged you to review nonpublic records for public release following a closure period of 20 years.

We learned of this development after the fact. The Commission did not seek the advice or involvement of appropriate congressional committees or staff in formulating its recommendation to you. As the two original cosponsors of the legislation creating the Commission in 2008, we are troubled by this lengthy and excessive delay in making the Commission’s records available to the public. We ask that the National Archives make a full disclosure of the Commission’s files and records as quickly as possible, consistent with protections for privacy, proprietary information, and other applicable laws.

The importance of public disclosure relates directly to the Commission’s original legislative mandate—to assess contingency contracting for reconstruction, logistics, and security functions; to examine the extent of waste, fraud, and abuse; and to improve the structure, policies, and resources for managing the contracting process and contractors. The Commission’s own work stressed the importance of increasing transparency and accountability for contracting operations.

Much like the World War II-era Truman Committee it was patterned after, the Commission performed a critical “watchdog” role during its three-year existence. The appropriate committees of Congress are addressing the many constructive findings and recommendations contained in the Commission’s two interim reports and final report. Of note, the Commission concluded that at least $31 billion, and possibly as much as $60 billion, has been lost to contract waste and fraud during U.S. contingency operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The enduring importance of the Commission’s work, however, did not end when it terminated its operations five weeks ago. Commission records constitute a very important source of reference material for the public at large, journalists, professional associations, academicians, historians, and others. Simply stated, we need to live in the light. Sealing records for 20 years is inconsistent with the goals we established for the Commission when Congress acted to create the Commission three years ago.

More timely, accurate, and substantial disclosure of the nonpublic materials provided by the Commission will help to achieve the transparency that the American taxpayer deserves. We appreciate your cooperation in this matter and look forward to your response at the earliest convenience.

Sincerely,

Claire McCaskill                  Jim Webb
United States Senator      United States Senator

Please see the original post at MsSparky and POGO

November 10, 2011 Posted by | Civilian Contractors, Commission on Wartime Contracting, Contingency Contracting, Contractor Corruption, Contractor Oversight, Government Contractor, Wartime Contracting | , , , , , | Leave a comment

USACE awards KBR, Louis Berger and IAP $490M electrical contracts in Afghanistan…..Really?

Cross Posted from MsSparky’s  November 8, 2011

On September 30, 2011 , along with and Worldwide Services, Inc. were awarded contracts by the The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to provide electrical services for contingency operations in . This $490 million dollar contract is to perform electrical services for prime power operations in support of any location within the Afghan Theater of Operations. This contract supports any and all U.S. facilities in , as required, up to the maximum capacity of $500 million.

The contract includes generator set Operations and Maintenance (O&M), preparation, transport, installation, preventive maintenance, scheduled maintenance, emergency maintenance, service, fueling, relocating and recovering generator sets, associated fuel systems (if required), and all transmission/distribution system maintenance including the underground or overhead system at the U.S. Facilities from the generators to the transformer and associated switchgear.

USACE, who has had their own employee issues lately, acts as if there are no other contractors out there who can do this work! Not to mention, I suspect these three contractors will load up on cheap third world or Afghan labor to perform this work instead of licensed electricians, further propagating US sponsored human trafficking.

Let’s take a look at these contractors one by one at MsSparky’s

November 8, 2011 Posted by | Afghanistan, Civilian Contractors, Contingency Contracting, Contractor Corruption, Contractor Oversight, Contracts Awarded, KBR, Safety and Security Issues | , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Are Government Contractors Exploiting Workers Overseas?

Our answer is that some Government Contractors are exploiting workers overseas by not filing Defense Base Act Insurance Claims on deaths and injuries of foreign workers.  Where is the investigation of this?

by David Isenberg at Huff Post  November 7, 2011

The following is an excerpt from the congressional testimony I gave yesterday. You can find the entire testimony on my blog (free registration required).

Testimony of David Isenberg Publisher, PMSC Observer and Author, Shadow Force: Private Security Contractors in Iraq, before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, Subcommittee on Technology, Information Policy, Intergovernmental Relations and Procurement Reform, on “Are government contractors exploiting workers overseas? Examining enforcement of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act“November 2, 2011

Chairman Lankford, Ranking Member Connolly, other Members of the Subcommittee,

Thank you for the opportunity to testify at this hearing.

I commend you for examining the issue of whether government contractors exploit workers overseas. It is unquestionably a problem. Though it has come up elewhere it has not yet received the sustained attention it merits. As the Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan noted in its final report:

U.S. contingency contractors, opportunistic labor brokers, and international criminal organizations have taken advantage of the easy flow of people, money, goods, and services to capitalize on this source of revenue and profit. Their actions bring discredit to the United States and act as a barrier to building good diplomatic relations.

The subject also means you have to look at the relationship between prime contractors and their subcontractors, which is another problem. It is often, to cite Winston Churchill, a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma.

I am pleased to be here to discuss the The Najlaa Episode Revisited report that I co-authored, which was published by the Project on Government Oversight this past June. I have a prepared statement which I ask be included in the hearing record in its entirety, along with the POGO report. In the interest of time I will just summarize some of the main points.

But first, let me outline where I stand on the ongoing debate over the outsourcing and privatization of functions that used to be considered inherently governmental. I am not an opponent of private military and security contractors. Nor am I am a fervent supporter. Over the years I have documented problems with the claims of both sides. Personally, I think most contractors, especially those operating in the field, are decent, honorably men and women, doing necessary, even vital work, under harsh and demanding conditions. Some of them, I believe, especially on the security side, are underpaid. But in the end I am simply an interested observer and chronicler, who, like the Mr. Spock character on the Star Trek television series, finds it a “fascinating” phenomenon worthy of continued study and analysis.

Speaking of science fiction we might note that the use of private actors in war and conflict is something that sc-fi writers have long written about, as in Gordon Dickinson’s Dorsai novels. So, in one sense, the subject of today’s hearing is an example of life imitating fiction.

First, let me address why this is important. For years industry advocates have been claiming that thanks to private military contractors (PMC) U.S. military forces have the best supported, supplied military in any military operation in history. It is inarguably true that PMC are now so intertwined and critical that the U.S. military simply can’t operate without them.

But that is not an unmitigated benefit. Many PMC have had problems implementing contracts. Some have committed outright fraud, thus wasting U.S. taxpayer’s money, and indirectly, negatively affecting U.S. military operations.

While the seven plus years has seen increased attention paid to the oversight of and accountability of PMC most of that attention has been at the level of prime contractors. Only now is government beginning to turn to the issue of subcontractors. This attention is long overdue. As the Center for Public Integrity noted last year

Please read the rest of David’s testimony at his blog The PMC Observer

November 7, 2011 Posted by | Civilian Contractors, Contingency Contracting, Contractor Corruption, Contractor Oversight, Defense Base Act, Government Contractor | , , , , , | Leave a comment

FAR Councils issue final rule aimed at preventing contractor employee Personal Conflicts of Interest

Lexology November 3, 2011

On November 2, 2011, the Civilian Agency Acquisition Council and the Defense Acquisition Regulations Council (FAR Councils) issued a final rule on “Personal Conflicts of Interest,” or “PCIs,” that will place significant new obligations on contractors and contractor employees.

76 Fed. Reg. 68,017 (Nov. 2, 2011). The rule requires contractors that have employees performing “acquisition functions closely associated with inherently governmental functions” to identify and prevent PCIs for such employees. It also requires such contractors to prohibit “covered employees” with access to non-public Government information from using it for personal gain. The final rule implements section 841(a) of the Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009, Pub. L. No. 110-417, and follows a proposed rule issued nearly two years ago, 74 Fed. Reg. 58,584 (Nov. 13, 2009).

The final rule, which includes only minor revisions from the proposed rule, creates a new subpart under FAR part 3 (FAR subpart 3.11), as well as a new clause for Contracting Officers (COs) to use in contracts (FAR 52.203-16). The rule’s effective date is December 2, 2011. The new clause will be included in all covered contracts and task or delivery orders issued on or after the effective date. COs are instructed to modify, on a bilateral basis, existing task- or delivery- order contracts to include the new clause for future orders. In the event that a contractor refuses to accept such a modification, the contractor will not be eligible to receive further orders under the contract.

Please read the entire post for important information regarding implementation, obligations for contractors, and definitions of the terms here

November 6, 2011 Posted by | Civilian Contractors, Contingency Contracting, Contractor Oversight, Government Contractor, Legal Jurisdictions | , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Out of Iraq: What Will the War Service Industry Do Now?

by Dina Rasor at Truthout  October 26, 2011

Jared Rodriguez/Truthout

I also talked about the new faction of military contracting, which I call the war service industry, and how it is going to handle the shrinking of this war, because they won’t have a hot war or occupation in Iraq to keep the billions of dollars flowing to their “life support” of the troops. I think that the Department of Defense (DoD) doesn’t really believe that we will pull out all the troops by December 31, 2011, and that the Iraqis will give our troops immunity so that some of them can stay.

That all changed when President Obama announced last Friday that the US will honor the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) that was negotiated by the Bush administration and the Iraqi government to remove all US troops by year’s end. This has caused a lot of scrambling by the DoD and the State Department on how to make this work while still maintaining the largest and most expensive embassy in the world in Iraq, and continue to train the Iraqi troops.

Once again, the war service industry, which is already deeply entrenched in our nine-year occupation of Iraq, will step in and make sure that their money flow will be maintained, albeit at a smaller level. The tricky part is the immunity problem, which the State Department has found a way to solve – they will take over the war contractor contracts, which will put most of the contractors under diplomatic immunity and that can prevent contractors from being arrested by the Iraqi government and thrown into jail

Please read the entire article here

October 26, 2011 Posted by | Civilian Contractors, Contingency Contracting, Contractor Oversight, Follow the Money, Iraq, KBR, Legal Jurisdictions, Private Military Contractors, Private Security Contractor, State Department | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

$480M to GIS As Security Contractors to the USACE in Afghanistan

GISDefense Industry Daily  October 26, 2011

In October 2011, Global Integrated Security (USA), Inc. in Reston, VA won a 4-year, $480 million firm-fixed-price contract from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, for Reconstruction Security Support Services throughout Afghanistan. Work will be performed in Afghanistan, with an estimated completion date of Oct 19/15. Five bids were solicited, with 5 bids received by the USACE office in Winchester, VA (W912ER-12-D-0001).

Global Integrated Security has performed RSSS work in Afghanistan before. A $34 million task order in December 2009 focused on Kabul and Kandahar, but a March 2010 contract [PDF] from the US Army Corps of Engineers saw them expand those services to encompass a National Operations Center providing intelligence and analysis, reconnaissance teams, interpreters, aviation services throughout Afghanistan; and “mobile security support services” to USACE personnel during travel to, and presence at, construction sites

October 26, 2011 Posted by | Afghanistan, Civilian Contractors, Contingency Contracting, Contracts Awarded, Government Contractor, Private Military Contractors, Private Security Contractor, USACE | , , , , , | Leave a comment

DoD Report Shows Since 2001, $1.1 Trillion In Contracts Awarded to Companies Who Committed Fraud

The Economic Populist   October 20, 2011

One would think once a company had been convicted of defrauding the government, they wouldn’t see another dime. Not so, shows a new DoD report. Believe this or not, the DoD has awarded over $1.1 trillion dollars in defense contracts to companies have been convicted, found liable, or settled fraud charges earlier with the DoD since 2001.

Senator Bernie Sanders summed up some of the numbers buried in the report:

Over the past ten years, DOD awarded $254,564,581 to companies that were convicted of a crime in connection with a DOD contract during that same period of time. To make matters worse, DOD awarded $33,079,743 of that to convicted companies after they had been convicted.

Over the past ten years, DOD awarded $573,693,095,938 to companies that were found liable or settle charges of a civil wrong in connection with a DOD contract during that same period of time. To make matters worse, DOD awarded $398,081,775,397 of that to those companies after they settled the charges or were found liable.

The numbers become increasingly shocking if you look at company affiliations. Over the past ten years, DOD awarded $1,104,423,438,564.10 to entities affiliated with companies that have a history of fraud

Please read the entire post here

October 21, 2011 Posted by | Civilian Contractors, Contingency Contracting, Contract Awards, Contractor Corruption, Contractor Oversight, Contracts Awarded, Department of Defense, Government Contractor | , , , , | Leave a comment