Overseas Civilian Contractors

News and issues relating to Civilian Contractors working Overseas

The Invisible Foreign Subcontractor

David Isenberg at Huffington Post  August 16, 2012

See also Davids blog Institute of Strategic Satire

Last year I wrote a report for the Project on Government Oversight about and subsequently testified to Congress, regarding a Kuwaiti-based KBR subcontractor which had exploited hundreds of third-country nationals (TCN) coming from various South Asian countries.

Some of the subsequent press coverage criticized KBR, but that missed the point. Sure, in several respect KBR could have done much better, but at least it held special inspections documenting atrocious living conditions and threatened to cut off awards to the subcontractor.

But the real story is how little information the U.S. government has over the operations of foreign subcontractors. As I noted in my congressional testimony:

Subcontracting is among the most challenging parts of the U.S. government’s widespread outsourcing of war-related tasks. It works like this: A government agency – most likely the Defense Department, State Department, or U.S. Agency for International Development – will award work to a “prime” contractor. That prime contractor, usually a large American company like Kellogg, Brown and Root (KBR) or DynCorp International, will often subcontract some or even a majority of its work to other companies, including foreign-owned firms. Those subcontractors sometimes then turn around and subcontract part of the work, and so on.

But in footing the bill for all this work by a network of companies, the U.S. government often doesn’t know who it is ultimately paying. And that can lead to fraud, shoddy work, or even taxpayer funds ending up in the hands of enemy fighters.

For more detail the article “Limitations Of the Contingency Contracting Framework: Finding Effective Ways To Police Foreign Subcontractors In Iraq And Afghanistan” by Carissa N. Tyler in the Winter 2012 issue of the Public Contract Law Journal provides some valuable detail on the scope of this problem. For example, “Subcontractors are responsible for approximately seventy percent of the work of prime contractors; however, the Government has extremely limited visibility into these subcontractors’ operations. U.S. taxpayer dollars are at risk because U.S. agencies cannot directly police foreign subcontractors. ”

Please read the entire article here

August 16, 2012 Posted by | Civilian Contractors, Contractor Corruption, Contractor Oversight | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Employees of contractor barred from Iraq resurrect business

Wall Street Journal at Pittsburgh Post Gazette  May 17, 2012

On Jan. 3, 2005, Jerry Cullen signed an unusual document at the Baghdad headquarters of his employer, Custer Battles LLC, which the U.S. military had accused of fraud and barred from receiving any new Iraq contracts.

The document was a single-page “bill of sale.” Attached were several pages detailing assets such as cars, trucks, prefabricated housing and communications gear that Custer Battles was selling. The buyer was a little-known company in Bucharest, Romania, called Danubia Global Inc. The document said Danubia would pay Custer Battles “U.S. One Dollar” upfront, and an unspecified amount of money in the future. The company never gave Custer Battles any additional money, Danubia executives say.

While the U.S. sanctions technically put Custer Battles out of business, it never actually shut down. After paying its dollar, Danubia took on most of Custer Battles’s employees, who continued to work out of Custer Battles trailers on the grounds of Baghdad’s airport. They were paid, for a time, from Custer Battles bank accounts. Danubia’s owner, Richard Levinson, was a former Custer Battles senior executive. After signing the sale document, Mr. Cullen left Custer Battles to work for Danubia as a consultant.

Now, the Custer Battles-Danubia link is the focus of a federal criminal investigation. Law-enforcement authorities are exploring whether Danubia was an artificial entity created to evade the government ban on Custer Battles, according to investigators involved in the probe. They’re examining whether Danubia executives defrauded the federal government by obtaining millions of dollars of contracts they weren’t entitled to receive.

Mr. Levinson says in a phone interview that Danubia has no continuing ties to Custer Battles or that company’s two founders. He stresses that neither he nor any of the employees who went with him were linked to the wrongdoing at their former firm. “I can say simply, honestly, and without reservation that Danubia is not a shell company,” he says

Please read the entire article here

May 18, 2012 Posted by | Civilian Contractors, Contractor Corruption, Contractor Oversight, Department of Defense, Iraq | , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Tales from Chamber Contractor Oversight

Project on Government Oversight

October 28, 2011 Posted by | Civilian Contractors, Contractor Corruption, Contractor Oversight, Follow the Money, Government Contractor | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Statement Concerning Filing of Amended Class Action Tax Misclassification Against Xe Services (formerly Blackwater) on Behalf of Personal Security Specialists for Loss of Benefits and Withholding, Expenses, Penalties, and Treble Damages

Washington DC September 21, 2011

Scott Bloch files Amended Complaint against  Blackwater on behalf of thousands of former employees for unlawful, fraudulent and unconscionable treatment of employees in fraudulent misclassification as independent contractors

Since 2007, Blackwater Industries, which has changed its name to Xe Services, has employed over 10,000 personal security specialists to perform operations in Iraq and Afghanistan under lucrative contracts with departments of the United States Government including the State Department and CIA. While employing these individuals, many of whom are decorated veterans of the armed services including Special Forces, Army Rangers, Navy Seals, Blackwater sought to avoid millions of dollars in taxes, withholding, and payments of benefits to these employees by classifying them improperly as independent contractors.

Yesterday, Scott Bloch filed an amended complaint in the class action lawsuit on behalf of four former security specialists, who were injured while working for Blackwater, in order to recover their payment of social security, unemployment insurance, and unpaid benefits and state and local withholding and unemployment insurance, and other unspecified damages. The action is brought on their own behalf and thousands of others who have worked for Blackwater and its newly named Xe Services. The action seeks $240,000,000 in damages for lost benefits, overtime, treble damages and punitive damages, as well as additional amounts as proved for the class of specialists.

The suit also states that one of the representative plaintiffs already had a determination from the IRS that Blackwater misclassified him as an independent contractor. “The IRS already determined in the case of one of my clients that he should have been classified as an employee,“ said Bloch. “Now thousands of people will have to file amended returns. Thousands of people will likely be entitled to benefits they were denied due to the misclassification, including payment of their employer share of pension, health and disability insurance premiums, and other plans that Blackwater filed with the government for its employees, promising it would not discriminate against those employees as they did here.”

“Blackwater made hundreds of millions of dollars from taxpayers and hired thousands of former veterans of military service and police officers. They also had in their ranks Federal Agents, such as current employees of the FBI on leave of absence. They were hired as security specialists in Iraq and Afghanistan,” said Bloch. “It is a grave injustice to them who were mistreated and left without any health insurance or other benefits for their families, and left to fend for themselves in paying into Social Security and Medicare. They laid down their lives to protect dignitaries and carry out duties in support of wars for America, and they deserve better than this. Many of these same men risked their lives to protect everyone from the President of the United States to U.S. Senators, Congressman, U.S. Diplomats, to Foreign Presidential & Diplomatic Figures in one of the most dangerous places on the planet.”

One of the Plaintiffs guarded such dignitaries as the just assassinated Former Afghan President Burhanuddin Rabbani as well as current Secretary of State and then Senator Hillary Clinton.

“Blackwater acted illegally and unconscionably toward these brave individuals,” said Bloch. ”Through their fraud as pointed out in the Amended Complaint, they avoided overtime for security workers who worked sometimes 12-16 hours a day 6 days a week. They were forced to sign agreements they never read and were not given time to read and not given copies, which took away valuable rights and were unlawful in their terms.”

Read full PRESS RELEASE Amended Complaint against Xe Blackwater here.

Contact Scott J. Bloch, PA:

Scott Bloch, 202-496-1290

September 21, 2011 Posted by | Blackwater, Civilian Contractors, Contractor Oversight, Defense Base Act, Follow the Money, Government Contractor, Legal Jurisdictions, Politics, Private Military Contractors, Private Security Contractor, Ronco, Ronco Consulting Corporation, State Department, Taxes, Wartime Contracting | , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Up to $60B in war funds said wasted


As much as $60 billion intended for financing U.S. wars Iraq and Afghanistan has been lost to waste and fraud over the past decade through lax oversight of contractors, poor planning and payoffs to warlords and insurgents, an independent panel investigating U.S. wartime spending estimates.

In its final report to Congress, the Commission on Wartime Contracting said the figure could grow as U.S. support for reconstruction projects and programs wanes, leaving both countries to bear the long-term costs of sustaining the schools, medical clinics, barracks, roads and power plants already built with American tax dollars.

Much of the waste and fraud could have been avoided with better planning and more aggressive oversight, the commission said. To avoid repeating the mistakes in Iraq and Afghanistan, government agencies should overhaul the way they award and manage contracts in war zones, the commission recommended.

The Associated Press obtained a copy of the commission’s 240-page report in advance of its scheduled public release on Wednesday.

Created by Congress in 2008, the eight-member commission held more than two dozen hearings, interviewed hundreds of military and civilian officials and traveled multiple times to Iraq and Afghanistan. The panel’s final report is the most comprehensive examination so far of the U.S. dependence on contractors and the government’s ability to manage them in combat areas.

The commission said calculating the amount lost through waste and fraud is difficult because there is no commonly accepted methodology for doing so. Using information it has gathered over the past three years, however, the commission said at least $31 billion has been lost and the total could be as high as $60 billion. The commission called the estimate “conservative.”

Please read the entire story here

August 30, 2011 Posted by | Afghanistan, Civilian Contractors, Commission on Wartime Contracting, Contractor Corruption, Contractor Oversight, Follow the Money, Government Contractor, Iraq, Wartime Contracting | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

SIGAR Audit -11-13 July 20, 2011

SIGAR Special Investigator General for Afghanistan Reconstruction

Limited Interagency Coordination and Insufficient Controls over U.S. Funds in Afghanistan Hamper U.S. Efforts to Develop the Afghan Financial Sector and Safeguard US Cash

SIGAR Audit -11-13

What SIGAR Reviewed
Since 2002, Congress has appropriated more than $70 billion to implement security and development assistance
projects in Afghanistan, with some of those funds converted into cash and flowing through the Afghan economy.  The
United States is implementing programs to increase the capacity of Afghanistan’s central bank (Da Afghanistan Bank, or
DAB) to regulate the nation’s 17 commercial banks and to strengthen U.S. and Afghan law enforcement agencies’
oversight over the flow of funds through the Afghan economy.  This report (1) evaluates U.S. efforts to improve the
capacity of the Afghan government to regulate the financial sector (which includes commercial banks and informal
financial organizations, or hawalas) and (2) assesses the controls that U.S. agencies use to track U.S. funds as they flow
through the Afghan economy.  To accomplish these objectives, we reviewed Afghan laws and U.S. policies, plans, and
progress reports relevant to U.S. financial sector development initiatives. We met with officials from the Departments
of State, Homeland Security (DHS), Treasury, Defense (DOD), and the U.S. Agency for International Development
(USAID).   We conducted our work in Washington, D.C., and Kabul, Afghanistan, from October 2010 to July 2011 in
accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.

Please read the entire original report here

July 20, 2011 Posted by | Afghanistan, Civilian Contractors, Contingency Contracting, Contractor Corruption, Contractor Oversight, Department of Defense, Follow the Money, Government Contractor, Private Military Contractors, SIGAR, State Department, USAID | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Dangerously Blurring the Line: How the DoD Allows Contractors to Grade Themselves and Write Their Own Contract Terms

One of the most egregious actions in this report was to allow the contractors to write up the requirements of the follow-on contract and then allow them to bid and win the contract.

by: Dina Rasor, Truthout | Solutions   July 20, 2011

The Department of Defense (DoD) Inspector General’s (IG) office recently found that the Marine Corp allowed their contactors for a vital troop protection system to act as government employees, including directing and evaluating government employees’ work, grading their own work and writing up requirements for the follow-on contract. The contractors then bid on those requirements and won multimillion-dollar contracts.

The IG issued a report this month with the mundane title, “Contract Management of Joint Logistics Integrator Services in Support of Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicles Needs Improvement.” The report points out, in glaring examples, how the Marine Corp allowed two companies to infiltrate and control two very important logistics and maintenance contracts.

The program where this abuse occurred could not be more crucial to the troops. The program does maintenance support and logistics for the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles program (MRAP). MRAP is a $17.6 billion program to build or modify military vehicles with a V-shaped hull to prevent or reduce troop injuries and death from IEDs (Improvised Explosive Devices). MRAP was a rushed program because it had the potential to save lives and prevent severe injury at a time when IEDs were wreaking havoc on American troops in Iraq and Afghanistan

From the report:

On May 2, 2007, the Secretary of Defense designated the MRAP program as the highest priority DoD acquisition program and stated that all options to accelerate the production and fielding of the MRAP capability to the theater should be identified, assessed and applied where feasible. To reduce the burden on units receiving MRAP vehicles, JPO [Joint Program Office] MRAP established a forward presence in Iraq, Afghanistan, Qatar and Kuwait. According to the Joint Supportability Plan, the JPO MRAP Forward includes personnel from the JPO, JLI [Joint Logistics Integrator] and MRAP vehicle original equipment manufacturers to form an integrated team to stand-up, coordinate and execute JPO MRAP operations in theater.

The two companies, Jacobs Technology and SAIC (Science Applications International Corp) received contracts worth $193 million and $285 million, respectively, to do this work. SAIC started out as a subcontractor in the Jacobs Technology contract and then won the bid for the follow-on contract. This contract work was provided in Iraq, Afghanistan and Kuwait from 2007 to 2011 and the DoD provided only one government employee overseas to oversee the whole program.

Please go to TruthOut to read the entire report

July 20, 2011 Posted by | Civilian Contractors, Contractor Oversight, Department of Defense, Government Contractor, Private Military Contractors | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Senator blasts DoD for handling of contracts in Afghanistan

by Michelle Stein at Federal Times   July 1, 2011

Finding the party responsible for oversight of contractors in Afghanistan is “like I’m boxing ghosts” Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., said Thursday.

“The sad thing about this hearing is that I’d been hopeful back in 2007 that by this year we would have done a lot to overcome some of the problems in reconstruction contracts,” said McCaskill, who chairs the ad hoc Senate subcommittee looking into allegations of bribery, mishandling of funds, and the lack of accountability throughout the contractor system.

“This hearing does not make me feel good about the progress we’ve made,” she said. “There has been some progress, but the American people cannot afford this anymore.”

Please read the entire story at Federal Times

July 1, 2011 Posted by | Afghanistan, Civilian Contractors, Contractor Corruption, Contractor Oversight | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

MsSparky’s 1000th Blog Post

Cross Posted from MsSparky

Oh my! 1000 published blog posts! Who would have figured after 30 months of investigative blogging I would still be at it. 1000 published posts is a huge accomplishment for any blogger. I’m very proud of this milestone!

One would think I would have run out of things to write about regarding Defense contracting fraud and Pentagon incompetence, but it just keeps spewing forth. It’s like the Defense Departments very own “Old Faithful” geyser of crap! It just keeps blowing! I have to thank companies like Fluor, Dyncorp, CSA, SBH, Blackwater, ArmorGroup, Agility and mostly….(tearing up) KBR for making stupid management decisions that always give me something to write about. I will be forever grateful (sniff sniff).

I couldn’t have met this milestone without the support of my friends and family, my regular readers, guest writers, other collaborating bloggers, published authors, investigative reporters, super sleuths, whistle blowers, attorneys, concerned citizens, former and current defense contractor employees, widows, spouses, parents and most importantly………

I have to say, this has been a most amazing journey with the most interesting twists and turns along the way. Blogging at is not like any 9-5 job I’ve ever had. I can’t really plan my day. I may THINK I know what I’m going to be doing after I get that first cup of coffee, but then reality sets in when I open my email and there’s some little (or big) gem of information. I just get all excited like a kid on Christmas morning! 2010 has been an interesting year because the majority of my work has been unpublished and behind the scenes. It doesn’t pay much in dollars, but I think this is the most rewarding and satisfying job I have every had!

One of the hardest, but most rewarding parts of this job is watching victims prevail as they doggedly pursue justice not only for themselves but for others. I’ve watched victims overcome tragedy and turn their pain and grief into something positive for those still suffering. I’m in constant awe of the strength and determination of the human spirit.

Without a doubt, the very best part of this job are the friends I’ve made along way.  Some, I’ve never met in person. Some, I never will, but friends just the same. I am truly blessed!

Thank you for the FIRST 1000 posts!

Please see the original with comments at MsSparky

December 15, 2010 Posted by | Afghanistan, ArmorGroup, Blackwater, Burn Pits, Civilian Contractors, Contingency Contracting, Contractor Corruption, DynCorp, EODT, G4S, Halliburton, Iraq, KBR, LOGCAP, Private Military Contractors, Private Security Contractor, Safety and Security Issues, Triple Canopy, Wackenhut | , , , | 1 Comment

Posting Federal Contracts Online: The Next Step in Contracting Transparency?

OMB Watch

The Civilian Agency Acquisition Council and the Defense Acquisition Regulations Council issued an advance notice of proposed rulemaking on May 13 that could establish standards for posting federal contracts online. Providing the public online access to electronic copies of federal contracts could create a new level of accountability in federal procurement, but some contractors have opposed the idea, claiming it would cost too much and could reveal confidential business information.

Developing a means to quickly post federal contracts and related documents online could shed new light on how the government spends hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars each year.

As a senator, President Obama co-sponsored the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), which was signed into law by President George W. Bush and resulted in the creation of USAspending.gov. While USAspending.gov answered questions about who receives government money, as well as how much and what the money was for, it failed to answer the more fundamental questions of why the agencies made the contracting choices they made and whether contractor performance was adequate. Why did some contractors repeatedly receive large contracts with almost no competition? Why were some products and services so expensive? Why did some agencies have to outsource so many activities? Did the contractor actually do the work it was being paid to do and was the work completed on time? Posting contract documents online certainly won’t answer all of these questions, but it would likely be the first significant step into understanding the government’s choices.

Read the entire article here

September 16, 2010 Posted by | Civilian Contractors, Contractor Oversight | , , , , | Leave a comment

U.N. group investigates mercenaries

UPI Asia.com

UNITED NATIONS, July 26 (UPI) — More oversight and monitoring at the national and international level are needed for private military contractors, a U.N. group said.

A U.N. working group on the use of mercenaries and private military and security companies is briefing U.N. delegates on the international mechanisms needed to regulate such activity during a weeklong conference at U.N. headquarters this week.

Private security and military contractors are under fire for their role in combat zones.

Erik Prince, the founder U.S. private security company Xe, told an audience in Holland, Mich., in May that security forces working for his company in Afghanistan called in NATO support during operations in 2009.

Critics say contractors like Xe are operating outside of international law.

Prince during his Holland speech responded to accusations that his contractors were potentially violating the Geneva Conventions by acting as unlawful combatants in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan. He said militants there were “barbarians,” adding, “They don’t know where Geneva is, let alone that there was a convention there.”

Members of the working group, the U.N. news center reports, are expected to call for tighter regulations at the national and international level to monitor the work of mercenaries and private security contractors.

July 27, 2010 Posted by | Afghanistan, Civilian Contractors, Contingency Contracting, Contractor Oversight, Private Military Contractors, Private Security Contractor, United Nations | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Military Task Force Tackles Thorny Issue of Contractors in Afghanistan

Task Force 2010 Will Oversee Billions in Pentagon Contracts

By Spencer Ackerman 6/21/10 6:00 AM Washington Independent

It has an uncertain budget, a team of fewer than two dozen military officers and civilians, and barely a year to make its mark on counterinsurgency in Afghanistan before the U.S. begins its transfer of security responsibilities to Afghans. In that time, a new military task force will attempt to get a handle on one of the thorniest aspects of the way the U.S. military fights its wars: its relationship with the small army of contractors it hires for support.

The brainchild of Gen. David Petraeus, the commander of U.S. forces in the Middle East and South Asia, and Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the new task force in Afghanistan, known as Task Force 2010, will “follow the money,” as Petraeus testified to a Senate panel on Wednesday, to ensure that billions of dollars’ worth of Pentagon contracts dispersed to U.S., Afghan and foreign companies don’t end up in the hands of U.S. adversaries or otherwise subvert U.S. strategy.

Task Force 2010 is led by Rear Adm. Kathleen Dussault, a longtime Navy logistics officer who served as senior contracting overseer when Petraeus commanded the U.S. war in Iraq. Dussault arrived in Kabul last week after meeting the week before with John Brummet, the head of audits for the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction, for a briefing on “forensic audits,” something Brummet described as a “data-mining effort to look at financial transaction data” for “various anomalies” indicating waste, fraud or abuse.

While it’s too new to have a specific agenda delineated yet, U.S. officials who would not speak for attribution described Task Force 2010 as focusing on the intersection of contractor money and political power in southern Afghanistan, and giving senior military officers a greater amount of visibility into murky networks of subcontractors using taxpayer dollars than they currently have. Among its areas of focus are the private security companies outside of McChrystal’s operational control whose independent activities have sometimes proven problematic for the U.S. in Afghanistan. The task force has established an Armed Contractor Oversight Division to help advise Stanley McChrystal, the commanding general of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan, on how to deal with the companies.

“It’s not just about illegal activity for this task force,” said a U.S. military officer familiar with Task Force 2010’s work. “There’s also perfectly legal activity undercutting what we’re trying to do in Afghanistan. Whether it’s prime [contractors] or subs, getting down to power brokers and money lords, it’s absolutely undercutting what we’re trying to do.”

Expect to hear the term “power broker” a lot with regard to Task Force 2010. It’s a politically neutral euphemism for one of the most complex problems that the U.S. faces in Afghanistan, and particularly in southern Afghanistan: how U.S. contract money entrenches local political dynasties, some of which raise or hire independent security forces and can have transactional relationships with the Taliban. Some use their contract money to consolidate their hold on power by providing jobs, thereby emerging as potential obstacles to the overarching U.S. strategy of expanding the Afghan government’s reach, capability and relevance, which McChrystal considers pivotal for securing U.S. interests in the country.  Read the full article here

June 21, 2010 Posted by | Afghanistan, Civilian Contractors, Contingency Contracting, Contractor Corruption, Contractor Oversight, Pentagon, Private Military Contractors, Private Security Contractor, Wartime Contracting | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Private Contractors Running Wild with Little Oversight, Paid For By YOU

May 27, 2010 Posted by | Civilian Contractors, Contingency Contracting, Contractor Corruption, Contractor Oversight, Wartime Contracting | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Contingency Contracting: A Framework for Reform

United States Department of Defense
Office of Inspector General

Contingency Contracting:  A Framework for Reform

Report No. D-2010-059
May 14, 2010

Download here

May 25, 2010 Posted by | Civilian Contractors, Contingency Contracting, Contractor Corruption, Contractor Oversight, Wartime Contracting | , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Latin American counternarcotics contractors lack accountability, senator says

“Are you kidding me?” she asked the witnesses. “Have we gotten to the point where we have to hire a contractor to prepare for a hearing on contractor oversight?

By Dana Hedgpeth Washington Post

A key lawmaker questioned Thursday whether the U.S. government is adequately overseeing the roughly $1 billion it pays contractors to help governments in Latin America combat production and trafficking of illegal drugs.

Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), who chairs a subcommittee on contracting oversight, criticized the State Department and Pentagon for their monitoring and management of large contracts that supply counternarcotics assistance to governments in Central and South America. The contractors provide a range of services, including the training of local police forces and the eradication of coca plants used to produce cocaine.

McCaskill said the agencies had been slow to provide her office with the most basic information, including how much is being spent, what kind of work is being performed and whether periodic evaluations and audits are being done. Companies receiving contracts from the agencies include Northrop Grumman, ITT Systems, Lockheed Martin and DynCorp. The United States has issued similar contracts for counternarcotics work in Afghanistan.

“It makes us worry if somebody is minding the store,” McCaskill said. “I have an uneasy feeling that there’s much more oversight that needs to be done.”

William F. Wechsler, deputy assistant secretary of defense for counternarcotics and global threats, agreed there was room for improvement. In his written testimony, he said his office “found inconsistent records management” among the multiple agencies that oversee the counternarcotics contracting work. He also said that the “volume of procurement activities overwhelms staff capacity in some instances” and that “many of the acquisition steps are manual processes that are both time-consuming and error-prone.”

Wechsler said that the agency needed to “do a better job in evaluating its programs and measuring the return on its dollars” and that an internal management review would be underway by early summer.

McCaskill also expressed concern that Pentagon officials said they had to hire an outside contractor for $50,000 over the past few months to just pull the necessary paperwork to prepare for her hearing because they didn’t have enough government workers.

“Are you kidding me?” she asked the witnesses. “Have we gotten to the point where we have to hire a contractor to prepare for a hearing on contractor oversight? Original Story here

May 21, 2010 Posted by | Civilian Contractors, Contractor Oversight, Pentagon, State Department | , , , , , , | Leave a comment