Contractor Allegedly Sought Oversight Over Its Own Work

The Washington Post contains an article about a controversy involving an Army Future Combat Systems contractor:

A hotline complaint triggered the inspector general's investigation. The complainant said that SAIC was bidding on a contract to provide advice on an FCS element and that SAIC had not acknowledged the importance of its role in FCS.

The inspector general's report, which was signed by Mary L. Ugone, deputy inspector general for auditing, supports the allegations. According to the report, in the case of an Army test and evaluation command contract, SAIC helped develop the threat representation used to test FCS, which the company also helped develop.

When an Army contracting officer raised that objection, SAIC disagreed, saying that its work did not present "a perceived or actual conflict of interest" because the company "does not test or evaluate any system" and only supports the "activities that support test and evaluation."

The inspector general commended the Army contracting officer who raised the issue. The inspector general also challenged SAIC's claims that it reviewed all contract offerings on its own and does not bid where it sees a conflict.