Removing DCAA Director Won't Fix the Agency's Problems

POGO has learned that an e-mail was sent this afternoon to all Defense Contract Auditor Agency (DCAA) employees informing them that Patrick Fitzgerald, Director of the Army Audit Agency, will be appointed to head DCAA on November 9th.  The current Director of DCAA, April Stephenson, has accepted a position as Special Assistant to the Comptroller. Statement from POGO Executive Director Danielle Brian below.

Contractors have been on a rampage fighting new requirements being placed upon them by DCAA for the past year.  Removing the Director of DCAA does not address congressional and taxpayer concerns that this agency lacks the independence and clout necessary to serve taxpayer interests.  It would be unfortunate and ironic if congressional inquiries into the independence and strength of DCAA ultimately serves to strengthen the hand of contractors.

POGO's curious to hear contractor, DCAA employee, and taxpayer reactions to the news. As always, we encourage you to comment below.

-- Mandy Smithberger

See also:

• Target Practice with the DCAA
• Strengthening DCAA Through Independence and Additional Resources

Comments

[Posted on: Oct 28, 2009 at 07:58 PM]

Without getting into DCAA performance or staff issues, as I have previously noted, I believe DCAA should be separated from the Comptrollers office control and influence and become a more independent organization rather than essentially an internal audit group despite separate authorities.However its placement as a more independent organization does not, in my opinion, mean automatically integrating it with the DOD-OIG since, as I have also commented, the OIG-wide track record with respect to key performance elements such as timely and quality reporting and aggressive follow-up leaves much to be desired. Therefore, if realignment of DCAA is pursued serious consideration should be given to various options including a separate independent organization.For example, the Special IG for TARP that was set up specifically to oversight TARP has provided significant information in a timely manner about this program and adding another major component to a large OIG could easily increase the problem of timely reporting on major isssues.

[Posted on: Oct 28, 2009 at 05:47 PM]

Former Auditor is correct. Mike you are wrong. You might try reading the MRDs in question. Just a suggestion.

[Posted on: Oct 28, 2009 at 04:14 PM]

""If you listened closely to April's testimony, you would know that she stated DCAA only reports deficiences that are material, regardless."

Mike, if you ever listened to April personally deliver the presentation she makes to DCAA personnel, she says ANY deficiency at a major contractor is by definition material because major contractors have large dollar volumes of contracts. The logic is extremely poor and is part and parcel of April's poorly disguised attempt to try blaming anyone else for DCAA shortcomings. This one is designed to blame the contractor.

The MRD issued earlier this year instructing the DCAA to turn in DCMA or buying command personnel to the IG for disagreeing with DCAA audit reports was designed to blame contracting officers for DCAA shortcomings.

It was interesting to see that some of the more eggregious MRDs issued in the last year were signed FOR Ken Saccocia, not BY Ken. One could conclude even he knew they were way out of line.

[Posted on: Oct 28, 2009 at 11:49 AM]

Fraud, Waste & Abuse. It exists ! It is more acute from procurement and contracting officers. They are not trained. Their defective data packages are bolstered by the DoJ. I call that organization the Dept. of Injustice [DoI]. The DoI is loking to protect a flawed DLA/DFAS systemm as opposed to get to the truth and right a wrong. Aquisition reform is an oxymoron. Jay Bernhardt

[Posted on: Oct 27, 2009 at 08:12 PM]

"Contractors have been on a rampage fighting new requirements being placed upon them by DCAA for the past year. "

Such a statement completely ignores the legal and regulatory framework of government procurements. DCAA has powers conferred upon them. The DCAA does not have the power either legislatively or regulatorily to impose "new requirements". That smacks of overzealous empire building. April seriously overstepped her bounds in her power hungry zeal to further build the DCAA empire and expand her power. This calculated gamble obviously failed.

The agency is an advisor, not a policy setting body. Hopefully the government will sweep away the waste and abuse of DCAA management so that other government agencies can accomplish their missions in a timely and efficient manner. It would be refreshing if DCAA would start providing professional advice as they did a decade ago.

Now, it seems, DCAA's primary mission is to engage in witch hunts. It is truly sad the agency (mis)management has either forgotten their mission or doesn't care.

[Posted on: Oct 27, 2009 at 08:03 PM]

Why are people sickened by Stephensons removal? She did not reprimand the SES management who went after the whistle blower and she in fact may have been the one who gave the order to go after the whistle blower. How does anyone explain away Stephensons actions here? You cannot.

What significant improvements has Stephenson made on her own? She was forced to make the changes, they were not her ideas. If not for the GAO and Senate Hearings, we would be slaves today to meaningless metrics.

April Stephenson defenders are truely sad.

[Posted on: Oct 27, 2009 at 07:31 PM]

Social contractor...you are incorrect about the pass/fail system not providing contracting officers materiality. If you listened closely to April's testimony, you would know that she stated DCAA only reports deficiences that are material, regardless. If you understood the auditing standards, you would already know this. So what does it matter if it is inadequate or inadequate-in-part, contractors still have one or more deficiencies that have a material impact on government contracts. So many people, including the GAO and the Commission, incorrectly believe that deficiencies in an inadequte-in-part system are somehow less material than an inadequate system. A deficiency is a deficiency is a deficiency. It is all material so stop complaining.

[Posted on: Oct 27, 2009 at 12:02 AM]

I for one would like to see some evidence of the "rampage" defense contractors have been on. Yes, they have complained about DCAA's new audit guidance that establishes a binary pass/fail control system audit determination. Guess what? The GAO criticized it. So did the Commission on Wartime Contracting. Why? Because it doesn't help contracting officers assess deficiencies for materiality.

Using loaded words such as "rampage" doesn't help your credibility, POGO.

[Posted on: Oct 26, 2009 at 08:51 PM]

Outrageously stupid move on the Comptroller's part. No part of this makes sense. No part of this makes sense unless the Comptroller is trying to earn favors from contractors. I guess the revolving door of the Penatgon is alive a well. Bet the Comptroller gets a job with a contractor. Afterall that is where Tina Jonas and Dov Zakheim ended up. Make favors now so you have a job later. Dumb, dumb move!

[Posted on: Oct 26, 2009 at 07:59 PM]

I am sickened by the reassignment of Stephenson. She gave it her all and she was still reassigned. This is a completed cop-out on the part of the Comptroller. Now he can show he made change. But how, by removing the one person that was responsible for making significant improvements. Fitzgerald can only ride on Stephenson's improvements for so long and then his true colors will come out. I am too disgusted to write anymore. Game, set, match contractors.