[Ret10Echo]

Analysis: No easy answers for a lawmaker's contactor inquiry
December 21, 2009


By Max Cacas
Reporter
FederalNewsRadio


It seemed like a simple question at the time: How many contractors work for the Department of Homeland Security?

At the recent meeting of the Senate's Task Force on Government Performance (part of the Senate Budget Committee), Senator Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) questioned Elaine Duke, the Undersecretary for Management with the Department of Homeland Security.

McCaskill, who chairs a Senate subcommittee on government contracting, noted the receipt of a spreadsheet from Duke's office stating that there were "10,520 contractors working for DHS in the Washington, D.C. area. Of that, 961 work for you (Duke). "

Asked if those figures were accurate, Duke responded this way:

"The figures are based on algorithms, based on the cost of the contract, and using some very valid formulas, so they're as accurate as we can get under the current conditions."

Queried by McCaskill over why a statistical analysis was provided instead of a direct headcount, Duke said it was an issue was one with a history, and one that her office was trying to address with the Office of Federal Procurement Policy. She also told of previous efforts by the Bush Administration to obtain similiar information, and how industry push-back was so strong following the notice in the Federal Register that the administration quietly dropped any efforts to press for the contractor information.

For some perspective, we turned to Alan Chovotkin, the executive vice president, and general counsel at the Professional Services Council, a trade group that represents Federal contractors, who offered some thoughts as to why there is no monolithic list of the government contractors:


There have been several initiatives, started with the Army, to conduct not only an inventory of contracts, but also so-called "headcounts" of contractor employees. They've been through several iterations going through the regulatory and legislative process. In one case, it was reports requested of contractors across the board, without any differentiation of the type of contractor or the nature of the work. In another case, the Army would not agree to reimburse contractors for the cost of having to prepare rather substantial reports. And there were even questions that we raised at the Professional Services Council of the legitimacy and validity of counting heads, particularly under particular contract types where there was work to be accomplished, rather than the number of people required to accomplish the work.
Chovotkin says that this kind of information changes all the time, and at best, would provide only a snapshot of the contractor workforce at any given time.

He went on to acknowledge that as a lawmaker, McCaskill has a legitimate interest in understanding how the Department of Homeland Security is managing the department, and how the money is being spent. He also acknowledges that lawmakers have a legitimate interest in the number and type of contracts, and the dollars being spent. In an interview with Federal News Radio, Chovotkin says "we ought to have that discussion," when it comes to how and why a contractor headcount is relevant to agency oversight.

Chovotkin went on to say that in some cases -- providing security IDs to contractors working in a secure facility, or providing support for contractors living and working in Iraq and Afghanistan -- an employee headcount might be important to the execution of a contract, and the mission of the agency.


I think it's less relevant to know how many employees are working on a fixed price contract that's being performed on behalf of the department because there's nothing there that the department can manage. It has agreed through its contract to pay a price for if the price is fixed.
Chovotkin also questions how such a headcount would be administered, whether it would be contractors reporting individually on a company-by-company basis, or whether they would report to a central government entity, similar to reporting for the federal economic stimulus program to recovery.gov.

And the PSC's Alan Chovotkin believes that if the federal government were to implement a headcount reporting requirement, most contractors would work to comply with the mandate. ------