POGO Launches new Federal Contractor Misconduct Database

Today, POGO will officially release its revamped Federal Contractor Misconduct Database (FCMD). The database features the top 50 federal government contractors (according to OMB Watch's fiscal year 2005 ranking), and details instances of misconduct or alleged misconduct from 1995 to the present. Our records indicate that the top 50 contractors have received in excess of $177 billion in government contracts in fiscal year 2005, and have accumulated $12.5 billion in fines, penalties, restitution, or civil settlements since January 1, 1995. 

The improved database will include a company profile for each of the top 50 federal contractors, as well as contact information and links to their website, ethics page, SEC filings, and political activities. For each instance of misconduct, there is a summary describing the occurrence, as well as links to POGO’s sources of information. Additionally, the database features a list of helpful contracting resources, as well as a new, user-friendly sorting mechanism that will allow users to refine their searches by items like contractor name, misconduct type, date, and dollar amount. 

POGO expects the FCMD database to emerge as an important resource for the American public and government employees that will help shine a light on contractor misconduct. A recent New York Times article stressed that current misconduct databases have been criticized for being outdated and incomplete, and highlighted POGO’s database as a potential new tool for information. Hopefully, our new resource will be used to ensure that taxpayer funds are allocated to responsible contractors who have intentions of serving the American people honestly and efficiently.  Furthermore, we hope scrutiny generated by the FCMD will provide greater incentives for contractors to prevent misconduct.

POGO's general counsel, Scott Amey, will testify this afternoon before the House Oversight and Government Reform Subcommittee on Government Management, Organization, and Procurement. Scott's testimony will emphasize the need for contracting officers to have comprehensive information on contractors' practices in order to ensure that taxpayer dollars do not go to corporations with a list of past improprieties. It will introduce the FCMD as a means of enhancing accountability of our largest federal contractors.

-- Jesse Ferrantella

Comments

Your doing the government's work and it didn't even outsource it, ... yet. And don't mind Jumbotron, many civil and FCA settlements and administrative agreements are without any admission of liability or fault -- isn't that their purpose. It's like they say in the big house, "everyone's innocent." What else does he want, a listing of everyone's not guilty plea. Keep up the good work!

[Jumbotron]

You've cited more than one company for a false claims act matter that was settled. Ninety-nine out of a 100 FCA civil settlements say that as part of the settlement there was no admission of wrongdoing. The government doesn't label it as wrongdoing (or the payment as a fine or judgement), even though it has obviously extracted a settlement. Why? Because the allegations were never proved.

You should review all the FCA settlements you cite in the purportedly factual database you have given to the world, and note that there was no admission of wrongdoing if that is the case.

Don't you think that a contractor deserves this level of honest analysis and fairness from the maximum poobahs at POGO (has a nice ring to it, eh)? You--and rightfully skeptical taxpayers, litigators, and law enforcement--are entitled to your own understandable suspicions about possible reasons for a settlement. But, as they say, you are not entitled to your own facts.

[RJ]

Heck, perhaps competitors can use this when competing for new contracts. It's beyond me how a company like Exxon can continue to be awarded government business when they've been fined over 4 billion dollars for misconduct. I'm glad to see this collected like this, great job.

[flyover_27]

Excellent! This will be useful. Perhaps contract award committees should refer to it early in the screening process before considering awarding lucrative government contracts to companies.