pclj.orgpclj.org/.../2/files/2012/10/dda6e1d55a52e09ce8a866b8b… · web viewto pay, or not to...

TO PAY OR NOT TO PAYREDUCING IMPROPER PAYMENTS THROUGH

THE DO NOT PAY LIST

Rachel Cohn1101 New Hampshire Ave NW Apt 609

Washington DC 20037rlcohnlawgwuedu

Rachel Cohn is a JD Candidate at The George Washington University Law School and a member of the Public Contract Law Journal She wishes to thank Megan Bartley and Meg Nielsen for

their help and guidance throughout the writing process

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I The Recent Increase in Improper Payments3A What Are Improper Payments4B Efforts to Reduce Improper Payments65C The Do Not Pay List9D The Do Not Pay List is a Start but Not Enough 1110

II Information Databases Repeatedly Fail to Reduce Improper Payments12A Federal Procurement Data System1413B Past Performance Information Retrieval System1716C Excluded Parties List System2119D Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information

System2422III Plagued by the Same Defects The Do Not Pay List2725

A The Existing Databases Repeat the Same Mistakes 2826B The Do Not Pay List Does Not Rectify Problems in

Existing Lists2926IV Recommendation A Two-Part Solution3330

A Improving the Do Not Pay List Through Private Sector Analytics3330

B Impose Sanctions to Improve Contracting Decisions and Decrease Improper Payments3936

V Conclusion4038

i

ldquoIn total the [G]government made $116 billion in improper payments last year Imagine how many private and publicly traded

companies would shut down if they committed errors of this magnituderdquo1

In May 2007 the Government Services Administration (GSA)

debarred a chemical products company and its principals after the

Environmental Protection Agency and the Drug Enforcement Agency

discovered the company had conspired to defraud the Ggovernment

by affixing false manufacturing labels to chemicals being sold to

government agencies2 Despite debarment that same chemical

company has since received over $1 million in federal contract

awards from four different federal agencies including GSA3

One of the other agenciesAnother agency the United States

Department of Agriculture claimed it paid this same company over

$700000 after the debarment because it was exercising a one-year

option on an already existing contract and believed erroneously

that it was not required to check the database of debarred

1 Dave Dantus Agencies Must Erase Payment Errors to Cut Inefficiencies FEDE RAL TIMES (Nov 27 2011) httpwwwfederaltimescomarticle20111127ADOP061112703032 US GOVrsquoT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE GAO-09-174 EXCLUDED PARTIES LIST SYSTEM SUSPENDED AND DEBARRED BUSINESSES AND INDIVIDUALS IMPROPERLY RECEIVE FEDERAL FUNDS 10 (2009) [hereinafter EXCLUDED PARTIES LIST SYSTEM] Contractors suspended debarred or proposed for debarment are excluded from receiving contracts and agencies cannot solicit offers from award contracts to or consent to subcontracts with these contractors absent extenuating circumstances FAR 9405(a) Contractors debarred suspended or proposed for debarment are also excluded from conducting business with the Government as agents or representatives of other contractors Id3 EXCLUDED PARTIES LIST SYSTEM GAO-09-174 supra note 2 at 10

Keith Lusby 111112
I think using the report number is confusing as the supra form Irsquove changed it to an abridged version of the title ndash KML

companies before exercising the option4 GSA on the other hand

claimed that the company it continued to do business with was not

the same company that it had previously debarred5 Although GSA

said it researched the company before awarding the contract a

GAO investigation revealed that the company in question did not

appear in GSArsquos search of the debarred contractor database

because the original database entry did not include the required

unique identifying information for the company6

Awarding subsequent contracts to a debarred company is just

one of many examples illustrating the depth of the Ffederal

Ggovernmentrsquos current improper payments problem For example

iIn September 2006 GSA suspended a construction company after it

found the companyrsquos president had ldquoused fictitious Social

Security numbers to open multiple GSA auction accounts to bid on

surplus propertyrdquo7 Despite this suspension which should have

prevented additional awards the Department of Interior (DOI)

made seven awards to the company in 2007 totaling overin amounts

exceeding $2300008 Interior DOI failed to check federal 4 Id The federal acquisition guidelines state however that options cannot be exercised with debarred parties unless the head of the agency makes a determination that the agency should continue the contract FAR 9405-1(b)(3)5 EXCLUDED PARTIES LIST SYSTEM GAO-09-174 supra note 2 at 106 See Iid at 8 GSA had mistakenly entered the companyrsquos attorneyrsquos address into the database instead of the company address and even though the debarred company and the one GSA continued to do business with had the same name GSA officials mistakenly decided they were different companies Id7 Id at 128 Id

2

Keith Lusby 111112
Too close to a direct quote so paraphrased

databases that should have listed the company as suspended but

even if it had those databases were out of date9

This Note will discuss the Ffederal Ggovernmentrsquos failed

attempts to solve the ongoing improper payments problem and

explain why the latest attempt yet again fails to improve upon

past endeavors Part I of this Note will provide background on

the causes and amounts of improper payments Part II will

examine previous efforts to reduce improper payments and identify

the factors which that thwarted the success of those programs

Part III will explain why the Do Not Pay List -ndash the Ffederal

Ggovernmentrsquos current approach to reducing improper payments ndash-

like itrsquos predecessors is unlikely to result in a more

successful solution to this ongoingsucceed in eliminating this

ongoing problem challenge Part IV will propose a novel two-

pronged approach to help minimize the Ffederal Ggovernmentrsquos

improper payments without building additional databases

I The Recent Increase in Improper Payments

Improper payments to contractors have increased

significantly in recent years from over $72 billion in fiscal

year 200810 to $116 billion in fiscal year 201111 The rate of

9 Id10 Tom Cohen White House Reports Billions of Improper Payments in 2009 CNNPOLITICS CNN (Nov 18 2009 144 AM) httpwwwcnncom2009POLITICS1118governmentimproperpaymentsindexhtml11 Adam Aigner-Treworgy Dir Lew Improper Federal Payments on the Decline CNNPOLITICS (Nov 15 2011 438 PM)

3

Keith Lusby 111112
Irsquom the village idiot on the e-board when it comes to grammar but I prefer the initial way this sentence was written

improper payment peaked in fiscal year 2009 at 54212 This

represents approximately $1056 billion in improper payments in

fiscal year 200913 and an increase of over 37 from the $72

billion in improper payments in fiscal year 200814 In response

to these drastic increases the Ffederal Ggovernment has devoted

considerable resources to creating databases of contractor

information intended to prevent improper payments15

A What Are Improper Payments

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) defines improper

payments broadly as ldquoany payment that should not have been made

or that was made in an incorrect amountrdquo under applicable

requirements16 Improper payments include both underpayments and

overpayments or erroneous transfers of federal funds17 They

also encompass wrongful denials of payment or service payments

httpwhitehouseblogscnncom20111115dir-lew-improper-federal-payments-on-the-decline12 Improper Payments Overview PAYMENT ACCURACY httpwwwpaymetaccuracygov (last visited Oct 21 2012)13 Id14 Cohen supra note 101110 15 See discussion infra Parts IB amp IC 16 OFFICE OF MGMT amp BUDGET EXEC OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT OMB M-10-13 ISSUANCE OF PART III TO OMB CIRCULAR A-123 APPENDIX C REQUIREMENTS FOR IMPLEMENTING EXEC ORDER 13520 REDUCING IMPROPER PAYMENTS 44 (2010) [hereinafter REQUIREMENTS FOR IMPLEMENTING EXEC O R DER 13520] OMB is responsible for government-wide budget development and execution as well as oversight of agency performance and financial management See Office of Mgmt amp Budget The Mission and Structure of the Office of Management and Budget OFFICE OF M GMrsquo T amp BUDGET THE WHITE HOUSE httpwwwwhitehousegovomborganization_mission (last visited Oct 21 2012) 17 REQUIREMENTS FOR IMPLEMENTING EXEC ORDER 13520 OMB M-10-13 supra note 161515 at 4

4

111112
Could put a FN here to Adam Aigner-Treworgy Dir Lew Improper Federal Payments on the Decline CNN (from FN 11) which discusses generally that the Government is trying to decrease improper expenditure and work being done at different agencies JLI donrsquot think the source Julia suggestsions substantiates the point but the Note addresses these later on Irsquove inserted an infra FN instead - KML
111112
Looking at the source the section re 2009 lists 542 as the adjusted percent and $105 Billion as the adjusted amount (and explains why it is adjusted) JL

made ldquoto an ineligible recipient or for an ineligible servicerdquo

and payments for which an agency is unable to discern the

accuracy due to lack of appropriate documentation18

OMB has identified and categorized three main causes of

improper payments (1) documentation and administrative errors

which occur when an agency lacks the requisite documentation ldquoto

verify the accuracy of the recipientrsquos claim for federal

benefitsrdquo (2) authentication and medical necessity errors which

occur when an agency is ldquounable to confirm that the [intended]

recipient meets all of the requirements for receiving paymentrdquo

and (3) verification errors which occur when the Ggovernment

fails to verify recipient information such as earnings assets

or work status19 Improper payments typically can arise when an

agency either lacks accurate information or fails to consult the

correct information regarding the intended recipient of

government funds prior to payment20

B Efforts to Reduce Improper Payments

18 Id19 PAYMENT ACCURACY supra note 12 Pursuant to Executive Order 13520 this website is maintained by the Director of the Office of Management and Budget See id Documentation errors are typically caused by errors made in processing or classifying benefit applications at the agency level Id Authentication errors generally occur when a medical service is provided to a patient who does not require such a service Id The vast majority of improper payments in all three categories however are unintentional errors rather than fraudulent or intentional misuses of government funds Id 20 See Iid

5

111112
I donrsquot see where this source says that it is maintained by OMB pursuant to an executive order I think we can get rid of that sentence in the footnote though JLI agree its not substantiated by the website itself nor does the EO substantiate the claim Given that itrsquos not necessary I recommend removing ndash KML

Since the 1980s the President and various executive

agencies have implemented several initiatives and Congress has

passed legislation aimed at reducing improper payments

Pursuant to a 1986 executive order GSA created a government-wide

list of companies excluded from federal procurement and non-

procurement programs21 In 1990 and 1993 respectively Congress

passed the Chief Financial Officers Act22 and the Government

Performance and Results Act23 which each challenged agencies to

identify systematically measure and reduce improper payments by

requiring agencies to prepare annual performance plans including

strategies necessary to achieve such performance goals24 In

2002 Congress passed the Improper Payments Information Act

(ldquoIPIArdquo) which required OMB to quantify the amount of improper

payments reported by individual agencies25

21 EXEC ORDER NO Exec Order No 12549 3 CFR 189986 (1986) 22 Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990 Pub L No 101-576 104 Stat 2838 (1990)(codified as amended in scattered sections of 5 and 31 USC)5 USC sectsect 5313-5315 31 USC sectsect 501 901 1105 3501 9105 9106 (2006)23 Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 Pub L No 103-62 107 Stat 285 (1993) (codified as amended in scattered sections of 5 31 and 39 USC)31 USC sect 1101 nt (2006)24 See US GOVrsquoT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE GAOAIMD-00-10 FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT INCREASED ATTENTION NEEDED TO PREVENT BILLIONS IN IMPROPER PAYMENTS 5-7 n1 n2 (1999)25 Improper Payments Information Act (IPIA) of 2002 Pub L No 107-300 sect 2 116 Stat 2350 2350 (codified at 31 USC sect 3321 note (2006)) Nov 26 2002 IPIA was passed in response to a GAO report which recommended a coordinated approach to address the Ggovernmentrsquos improper payments problem US GOVrsquoT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE GAO-02-749 FIN MGMT FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT COORDINATED APPROACH NEEDED TO ADDRESS THE GOVrsquoTrsquoS IMPROPER PAYMENTS PROBLEMS 2 (2002)

6

Keith Lusby 111112
Titles donrsquot get abbreviated
111112
Are the versions of these Acts posted ok If not I can dig up another version JLVersion is OK by me ndash KML

Since taking office in 2008 President Obama has emphasized

reducing government waste and increasing accountability and

transparency26 As part of his Accountable Government

Initiative President Obama set an aggressive goal challenging

his administration to reduce improper payments government-wide by

$50 billion and to recapture at least $2 billion by fiscal year

201227

Through a series of executive orders and memoranda

President Obama has sought to make reducing improper payments a

priority for federal agencies In November 2009 the President

Obama required the OMB Director to identify high priority federal

programs ndash- those programs issuing the highest dollar amounts of

improper payments28 OMB created a website where it

publishespublishing information about these high priority

programs including targets for reduction of improper payments29

In March 2010 President Obama issued a memorandum to expand the

use of payment recapture audits a process through which

accounting specialists and fraud examiners utilize technology to 26 See OFFICE OF MGMT amp BUDGET EXEC OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICERS OF EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES CAMPAIGN TO CUT WASTE 1 (June 28 2011)27 OFFICE OF MGMT amp BUDGET EXEC OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT OMB M-11-04 INCREASING EFFORTS TO RECAPTURE IMPROPER PAYMENTS BY INTENSIFYING AND EXPANDING PAYMENT RECAPTURE AUDITS 1 (Nov 16 2010)28 Exec Order No 13520 74 Fed Reg 62m201 (Nov 20 2009) In response to the Order OMB issued guidance on how such programs were selected as well as how the annual or semi-annual agency improvement targets determined See REQUIREMENTS FOR IMPLEMENTING EXEC ORDER 13 520 OMB M-10-13 supra note 161515 at 529 PAYMENT ACCURACY supra note 121812

7

Keith Lusby 111112
I agree that no FN here is fine ndash substantiated by the text that follows
Keith Lusby 111112
Although technically a ldquomemorandum I think itrsquos morea kin toa report because it is published as opposed to unpublished The way to cite a memorandum falls under unpublished sources ndash KML

examine agency payment records and uncover duplicate payments

overpayments and fictitious vendors30

In June 2010 President Obama ordered the creation of a ldquoDo

Not Pay Listrdquo (the ldquoDNP Listrdquo)31 Touted as ldquoa single source

through which all agencies can check the status of a potential

contractor or individualrdquo32 Obama intended the DNP List to

provide information to federal agencies in ldquoa more timely and

cost- effective mannerrdquo33 In addition since the announcement

of the DNP List Congress has sought to keep the focuskept on

reducing improper payments in the spotlight by enacting related

legislation34 While improper payments are not a new problem 30 Memorandum on Finding and Recapturing Improper Payments 75 Fed Reg 12119 12119 (Mar 10 2010) In response OMB issued revisions to Part III to Appendix C of OMB Circular A-123 Managements Responsibility for Internal Controls which specifies responsibilities for agency officials determines the programs that are subject to the executive order establishes reporting requirements under the order and establishes procedures to identify outstanding improper payments See generally REQUIREMENTS FOR IMPLEMENTING EXEC ORDER 13520 OMB M-10-13 supra note 161515 OMB issued Parts I and II of Appendix C to OMB Circular A-123 in August 2006 as implementing guidance for IPIA (PUB L NO 107-300) and section 831 of the Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (PUB L NO 107-107 codified at 31 USC sectsect 3561-3567) also known as the Recovery Auditing Act Id at 1 n1 National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 Pub L No 107-107 115 Stat 1012 1019 (codified in 31 USC sectsect 3561-3567 (2006)) 31 Memorandum on Enhancing Payment Accuracy Through a ldquoDo Not Pay Listrdquo 75 Fed Reg 35953 (June 18 2010)32 OFFICE OF MGMT amp BUDGET EXEC OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT FACT SHEET DO NOT PAY LIST 1 (June 18 2010) 33 Id34 See eg generally Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery Act of 2010 Pub L No 111-204 124 Stat 2224 July 22 2010 (2010) Signed into law on July 22 2010 the Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery Act (ldquoIPERArdquo) amended IPIA and

8

111112
I posted the THOMAS version of HR 4053 ndash when I tried to click on the PDF it said it wasnrsquot ready yet JL
Rodney 111112
HR 4053 in Westlaw routes to some irrelevant 2005 bill and not the companion house bill being discussed However after a google search it appears as though official government websites (ie httptownshousegovpress-releaserepresentatives-edolphus-E2809CedE2809D-towns-todd-platts-kurt-schrader-and-gerald-connolly) note that the companion House bill is HR 4053

these recent efforts by the President and Congress seem to

indicate a renewed focus on reducing them

C The Do Not Pay List

The goal of the DNP List is to prevent improper payments

from being made in the first place35 Specifically it will

serve as a single source ldquothrough which all agencies can check

the [eligibility] status of a potential contractor or

individualrdquo recipient creating efficient access to information

to help reduce improper payments36

Although the ultimate plan is for the DNP List to exist as a

single database compiling the information and building the final

product is still a work in progress In the meantime the DNP

List exists only as a network of existing databases that agencies

are required to check prior to awarding a contract37 The

Treasury Department has been compiling this information to make

required OMB to issue guidance to federal agencies regarding the elimination of improper payments Id sect 2 In response to IPERA OMB re-issued Parts I and II to Appendix C of OMB Circular A-I23 OFFICE OF MGMT amp BUDGET EXEC OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT OMB M-11-16 ISSUANCE OF REVISED PARTS I AND II TO OMB CIRCULAR A-123 1 (Apr 14 2011) Recently Congress has proposed additional legislation on improper payments See eg also Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery Improvement Act of 2011 (ldquoIPERIArdquo) S 1409 112th 112th Cong (1st Sess 1st Session2011) Companion bill HRHR 4053 was introduced in the House of Representatives in February 2012 HR 4053 112th Cong (2012) 35 MEMORANDUM ON Enhancing Payment Accuracy Through a ldquoDo Not Pay Listrdquo 75 Fed Reg supra note 3329 at 3595336 FACT SHEET DO NOT PAY LIST supra note 323130 at 137 MEMORANDUM ON Enhancing Payment Accuracy Through a ldquoDo Not Pay Listrdquo 75 Fed Reg supra note 3329 at 35953

9

Keith Lusby 111112
Generally we donrsquot use supra cites for regulations and the federal register so I will treat this memo as such and just use a short cite

it available through a ldquocentral portalrdquo online38 This online

DNP List currently includes information from seven contractor

databases and other data sources are still being added39

D The Do Not Pay List is a Start but Not Enough

President Obamarsquos efforts and the creation of the DNP List

demonstrate progress but are not enough to neutralize the

increase in erroneous payments Previous pilot program efforts

and increased use of recovery audits decreased the rate of

improper payments in fiscal year 2010 to 52940 This amounts

to avoiding $38 billion n in avoided improper payments41

ldquoAgencies also reported recaptur[ing] $687 million in 38 Id S1409 sect 5(b)(1) sect 5(b)(1) 112th Cong (1st Session) supra note 323 at sect 5(b)(1) Jeff Zients Moving Aggressively on Improper Payments OMBLOG 1-2 (Sept 23 2011 255 PM) httpwwwwhitehousegovblog20110923moving-aggressively-improper-payments 39 Zients supra note 383736 Do Not Pay Portal DO NOT PAY POR TAL httpdonotpaytreasgovportalhtm (last visited Oct 21 2012) As of the date of this Note the online DNP List includes data from the Excluded Party List System with an Office of Foreign Asset Controls feed the Death Master File List of Excluded IndividualsEntities Excluded Party List System Debt Check Central Contractor Registration and The Work Number DO NOT PAY PORTAL httpdonotpaytreasgovportalhtm Id The online DNP List was intended to be completed by the end of 2011 Zients supra note 3736 In September 2011 OMB announced that the system was ldquoin production right now and will be available government-wide in a few monthsrdquo Zients supra note 38 at 2 Id The DNP online portal launched a Business Center in January 2012 which provides automated tools and single-entry access to three existing contractor databases GoVerify Business Center Preventing and Reducing Improper Payments U S DEPrsquoT OF THE TREASURY BUREAU OF TH E PUBLIC DEBT GOVERIFY BUSINE SS CENTER 4 ( Jan 11 2012) [hereinafter GOVERIFY] available at httpwwwfmstreasgovsfcGOVerify20Improper20Paymentspdf 40 PAYMENT ACCURACY supra note 1912 at 241 Zients supra note 383736 at 1

10

111112
I am not sure where the Zientrsquos source says that the DNP list was to be completed by 2011 I think that section of the FN can be removed without any problem though JLAgreed it doesnrsquot say by the end of 2011 just in a few months I removed that sentence ndash KML
111112
I was unable to find where the Zients source substantiates this statement The other sources does substantiate the statement although it is a webstite maintained by the US Govrsquot and there is not indication of how up to date it is JLI disagree ndash the source substantiates the claim and says it is being updates ndash KML
Keith Lusby 111112
I used a hereinafter form here because there are too zients pieces cited

improper payments in fiscal yearFY 2010 mdash- the highest amount

recovered to daterdquo42 The overall amount of improper payments

however still increased in fiscal year 2010 to an all-time high

of $125 billion43

The Ffederal Ggovernment continued to make progress reducing

improper payments in fiscal year 2011 but the Ggovernment is not

on track to meet President Obamarsquos goal of reducing improper

payments by $50 billion by fiscal year 201244 In 2011 OMB The

administration reported that in Fiscal Year 2011 ldquothe

[F]federal [G]government cut improper payments by $17618 billion

in wasteful and improper payments and recaptured $12 billionrdquo

in improper payments45 For the first time in six years the

amount of total improper payments declined from the previous

year down to approximately $116 billion with the error rate

decreasing to 46946 Since the start of the Accountable

Government Initiative the Ffederal Ggovernment has avoided 42 Id 43 Ed OrsquoKeefe Government Made $125 Billion In Improper Payments Last Year WASH INGTON POST (Nov 17 2010 757 PM) httpwwwwashingtonpostcomwp-dyncontentarticle20101117AR2010111706323html Even though the rate of improper payments decreased in fiscal year 2010 the overall amount increased because the economic recession has lead to increased numbers of payments for unemployment insurance and Medicaid benefits Id44 See Adam Aigner-Treworgy supra note 11 INCREASING EFFORTS TO RECAPTURE IMPROPER PAYMENTS BY INTENSIFYING AND EXPANDING PAYMENT RECAPTURE AUD ITS supra note 27 at 1145 IdAdam Aigner-Treworgy supra note 1146 PAYMENT ACCURACY supra note 121212 Aigner-Treworgy supra note 441111 Significant decreases in the amount of improper payments came from Medicare Medicaid Pell Grants and Food Stamps Aigner-Treworgy supra note 4411

11

111112
I donrsquot think the source cited substantiates the second part of the footnote re decreases in improper medicade etc payments I think this sentence in the footnote could be deleted though JL
111112
I would split FN 43 and cite to Aigner here because the most I can tell is that it says that the administration is making progress Then Irsquod make FN 43 just a citation to the OMB circular which sets the $50 million goal From my review of the documents the statement that the goal will not be reached is Rachelrsquos own hypothesis In fact the article seems to say the they were on target to meet a 2 billion goal set by Obama
111112
I am reaching out to Rodney and Rachel to see if they can get a print copy of this article JL

improperly paying out over $20 billion47 but still needs to

recover another $30 billion in the next year in order to meet

President Obamarsquos goal by the end of 20124849

[II] Information Databases Repeatedly Fail to Reduce Improper Payments While the Ffederal Ggovernment has made some significant

progress in reducing the rate of improper payments the

compilation of the DNP List is not an effective solution to this

end this ongoing problem The DNP List is unlikely to solve the

problem of improper payments because it is simply the next in a

series of failed attempts to create centralized access to a list

of entities that should not receive payment

The Ffederal Ggovernment has demonstrated a pattern of

creating ineffective lists intended to decrease improper

payments50 Over the last 18 years various agencies have

created numerous iterative lists that contracting officers and

other government officials must check before issuing an award or

payment There are four major lists which exemplify this

pattern (1)Federal Procurement Data System F(FPDS) (2) Past

Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) (3) Excluded 47 As noted previously in this Section in 2010 the Government avoided making improper payments in the amount of $38 billion In 2011 the Government avoided making improper payments in the amount of $18 billion When totaled the total number avoided is approximately $218 billion PAYMENT ACCURACY supra note 1248 See discussion supra Part IB (discussing President Obamarsquos goals) 49 PAYMENT ACCURACY supra note 1250 See discussion infra Parts IIA-D

12

111112
I would insert a footnote here saying See discussion infra Section IIA B C and D Done ndash KML
Keith Lusby 111112
I added this FN
111112
Could put this citation in here Increasing Efforts to Recapture Improper Payments by Intensifying and Expanding Payment Recapture Audits supra note 26 at 1I donrsquot think itrsquos needed though I think she just cited where this number came from above JL
Keith Lusby 111112
Sonia this is just the author doing some math that I explained below Not sure if Irsquom crazy about the footnote as I think her math should be readily apparent to the author Irsquoll leave it to your discretion however as to whether to leave it or not

Parties List System (EPLS) and (4) Federal Awardee Performance

and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS)51 Despite some

success each list suffers similar flaws that have thwarted the

success of those programs including (i) inaccurate and

incomplete data (ii) a flawed user interface and (iii) a lack

of accountability or centralized management52

A Federal Procurement Data System

The FPDS Federal Procurement Data System (ldquoFPDSrdquo) is the

Ffederal Ggovernmentrsquos ldquocentral archive of statistical

information on federal contractingrdquo53 FPDS aims to increase

trust and credibility among contracting professionals by

helpingallows contracting officials to examine data across

multiple agencies to make better contracting decisions54

However FPDS suffers from serious flaws which have prevented it

from serving as a single useful database of federal contracting

information55 FPDS contains incomplete data has a flawed user 51 See discussion infra Parts IIA-D52 See discussion infra Parts IIA-D53 Government Contract Records USAGOV httpanswersusagovsystemselfservicecontrollerCONFIGURATION=1000ampPARTITION_ID=1ampCMD=VIEW_ARTICLEampARTICLE_ID=11374ampUSERTYPE=1ampLANGUAGE=enampCOUNTRY=US (last visited Oct 21 2012)54 See id55 FPDS was modernized between 2003 and 2005 to create FPDS-NG in an effort to allow for more frequent data updates For the purposes of this Note FPDS and FPDS-NG are functionally equivalent as the system flaws occurring in FPDS continue to exist in FPDS-NG See ACQUISITION ADVISORY PANEL OFFICE OF THE FED PROCUREMENT POLICY OF THE US CONG REPORT OF THE ACQUISITION ADVISORY PANEL TO THE OFFICE OF FEDERAL PROCUREMENT POLICY AND THE UNITED STATES CONGRESS 434 438 (Jan 2007)

13

Keith Lusby 111112
I changed the author because the OFPP didnrsquot write the report the report was submitted to them The AAP is the institutional author responsible for the report KML
111112
I deleted the other potion of this sentence because the source didnrsquot substantiate it JL
111112
Again a FN that says ldquoSee idrdquodone
111112
Irsquod put a footnote here saying ldquoSee Idrdquo I think there should be footnotes stating that this ill be discussed and that is why it is not substantiated here JLdone
111112
She introduces the full names to these acronyms below I think they still need to be introduced here

interface and lacks accountability and standards for data

accuracy56

FPDS data is inaccurate and incomplete because the

information coming it receives from its feeder systems is not

properly reported57 Not all Ggovernment agencies that use

contractors are required to report information to FPDS58 FPDS

data relies depends on individuals to prepare contract action

reports correctly and the system has no means to ensure that

56 See eg US GOVrsquoT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE GAOAIMD-94-178R OMB AND GSA FPDS IMPROVEMENTS 1-2 (1994) [hereinafter FDSP IMPROVEMENTS] (explaining that FPDS has not kept up with user needs because it lacks a forum for identifying and addressing user needs the system technology is inefficient and the system lacks standards for accuracy and completeness of data) ACQUISITION ADVISORY PANEL OFFICE OF THE FED PROCUREMENT POLICY OF THE US CONG supra note 55 4849 at 445 The GAO has long reported concerns with FPDS almost since its inception Id57 See US GOVrsquoT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE GAO-05-960R IMPROVEMENTS NEEDED TO THE FEDERAL PROCUREMENT DATA SYSTEM-NEXT GENERATION 2-3 (2005)[hereinafter IMPROVEMENTS NEEDED TO THE FEDERAL PROCUREMENT DATA SYSTEM] Like PPIRS infra note 6361 tThe majority of the data comprising FPDS comes from the Department of Defense which has repeatedly failed to input accurate data on a timely basis and has delayed time frames for updating data already in the system Id The Department of Defense represents 60 of the contracting actions in FPDS and is the largest contracting entity in the Ffederal Ggovernment Id A review of the Small Business Administrationrsquos (SBA) FPDS data indicated that approximately 97 of the contract actions in the audit conducted by SBA system ldquocontained one or more inaccurate or incomplete data elementsrdquo US SMALL BUS ADMIN OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR G ENE RAL NO 10- 08 SBArsquoS EFFORTS TO IMPROVE TH E QUALITY OF ACQUISITION DATA IN THE FEDERAL PROCUREMENT DATA SYST EM MEMORANDUM AUDIT OF THE SBAS EFFORTS TO IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF ACQUISITION DATA IN THE FED PROCUREMENT DATA SYS REPORT NO 10-08 2 (Feb 26 2010)58 OFFICE OF THE FED PROCUREMENT POLICY OF THE US CONG REPORT OF THE ACQUISITION ADVISORY PANEL ACQUISITION ADVISORY PANEL supra note 55 4849 at 438

14

Keith Lusby 111112
The source says that the GAO has a long history of criticism but there is nothing to indicate such criticism dates back to its inception

such data if prepared at all is done accurately59 Contracting

officials therefore lack cannot have confidence in the system

because contractor names and dollar amounts are often listed

erroneously60

FPDS also suffers from a flawed user interface The current

FPDS website allows users to generate data reports through

standard reporting templates or through an ldquorsquoad hocrsquo reporting

toolrdquo61 GAO analysts who were trained on these tools did not

find either one easy to use62 System time-outs and delays

occurred frequently while trying to utilize either reporting

tool63 Users were also unable to extract government-wide data

in a simple machine readable format and instead had to retrieve

data separately for each government agency from multiple archived

files64

Finally FPDS lacks accountability hampering accurate and

timely reporting In 1994 the GAO noted that FPDS ldquodoes not

have standards detailing the appropriate levels of accuracy and

59 US GOVrsquoT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE PSAD-80-33 THE FEDERAL PROCUREMENT DATA SYSTEM ndash MAKING IT WORK BETTER 9 (1980)60 See id Additional reports noted that much of the inaccurate or incomplete data existed as a result of flaws in the feeder systems See id61 IMPROVEMENTS NEEDED TO THE FEDERAL PROCUREMENT DATA SYSTEM GAO-05-960R supra note 575151 at 362 Id GAO trained analysts found that the ad hoc reports were time-consuming to build and could not subsequently be saved meaning they would have to be re-built by the user each time the feature is utilized Id63 Id64 Id at 4

15

111112
I am not sure that the second part of this FN is substantiated I think we can delete the sentence JL

completeness of FPDS datardquo65 For example there is no person or

entity responsible for overseeing the proper transmittal of

data66 Instead FPDS relies on voluntary contributions from

agencies for operational and enhancement funding67 As a result

it is incredibly difficult for FPDS to make changes and correct

flaws in its system making it unlikely to improve contracting

decisions and decrease improper payments

B Past Performance Information Retrieval System

The goal of Past Performance Information Retrieval System

(ldquoPPIRSrdquo) a repository of government contractorsrsquo prior

performance history is to share that information across

government agencies to better inform contract award decisions68

Created and run by the Naval Sea Logistics Center (NSLC) the

information in PPIRS is compiled from the Department of Defense

the National Institute of Health and the National Aeronautics

and Space Administration69 65 FDSP IMPROVEMENTS GAOAIMD-94-178R supra note 565049 at 266 See OFFICE OF THE FED PROCUREMENT POLICY OF THE US CONG ACQUISITION ADVISORY PANEL supra note 55 4849 at 44367 Id FPDS must rely on voluntary contributions because as part of the Integrated Acquisition Environment it is funded by agencies as a way to integrate and leverage the investments in automation across agencies Id68 US GOVrsquoT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE GAO-09-374 FEDERAL CONTRACTORS BETTER PERFORMANCE INFORMATION NEEDED TO SUPPORT AGENCY CONTRACT AWARD DECISIONS 1 (2009) [hereinafter BETTER PERFORMANCE INFORMATION NEEDED] 69 GovWin Editor Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) GOVWIN (Nov 23 2010 1642) httpgovwincomknowledgepast-performance-ppirs Most of the information in PPIRS comes from the Department of Defensersquos Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (ldquoCPARSrdquo) and the National Aeronautics and Space Administrationrsquos feeder

16

Despite the NSLCrsquos efforts to create a single easily

accessible database for all past performance data PPIRS suffers

from a number of flaws which prevent it from reducing improper

payments to contractors with poor past performance records

incomplete data flawed user interface lack of guidance for how

agencies should use PPIRS information and general lack of

oversight

First PPIRS provides incomplete data Agencies

contributing information to PPIRS do not document and report all

relevant past performance information for each contract and they

often fail to report any information for certain types of

contracts70 For example PPIRS data from fiscal years 2006 and

2007 indicates that ldquoonly a small percentagerdquo of contracts were

accompanied by a performance assessment71 Similarly PPIRS data

typically fails to include helpful information such as

information about terminations for default and management of

subcontracts72 A report by the Department of Defense Inspector

system Id The civilian information in PPIRS came primarily from the National Institute of Healthrsquos Contractor Performance System before it was shut down in September 2010 due to architectural problems and the Ffederal Ggovernmentrsquos desire to consolidate further Id70 BETTER PERFORMANCE INFORMATION NEEDED GAO-09-374 supra note 686261 at 3 PPIRS lacked contractor past performance for contract actions involving task orders or deliveries placed against GSArsquos Multiple Award Schedules as well as for contracts above a certain monetary threshold as required by the FAR Id at 3 10-11 FAR 421502 71 BETTER PERFORMANCE INFORMATION NEEDED GAO-09-374 supra note 686261 at 372 Id at 3

17

Keith Lusby 111112
Footnoted in the following paragraphs ndash Irsquom OK with not FNing here

General found CPARS which feeds into PPIRS ldquoto be so lacking in

completeness that contracting officials [using PPIRS] lsquodo

not have the information they needed to make informed

decisions aboutrelated to contract awards and other

acquisition mattersrsquordquo73

Second PPIRS has a flawed user interface For instance

PPRIS lacks the ldquotools and metrics that managers [require] to

properly oversee the timely documentation of past performance

evaluationsrdquo74 The database also lacks standard evaluation

factors and rating scales which makesmaking it difficult for

agency officials to compare data with meaningful aggregate

measures75

Third PPIRS does not guide agencies on how ndash- or even

whether -- to utilize the information in the system76

Contracting officers frequently make award decisions based on

factors other than past performance77 Further contracting

officers have difficulty relying on the past performance

evaluations in PPIRS because there is no guidance on how to use

73 Neil Gordon Jeepers Creepershellip Whatrsquos the Deal with PPIRS PROJECT ON GOVrsquo ERNMEN T OVERSIGHT (May 26 2009) httppogoblogtypepadcompogo200905jeepers-creeperswhats-the-deal-with-ppirshtml (quoting INSPECTOR GEN ERAL US DEPrsquoT OF DEF CONTRACTOR PAST PERFORMANCE INFORMATION 14 (1998))74 BETTER PERFORMANCE INFORMATION NEEDED GAO-09-374 supra note 686261 at 375 Id76 See id at 2-3 For many years agencies had broad discretion as to how to utilize PPIRS data if at all Id77 Id at 8

18

Keith Lusby 111112
As a general rule the DOD IG report would be first in the citation however since itrsquos a direct quote its appropriate to list the article first ndash KML

the past performance data objectively and assess its relevance to

a given award78

Fourth PPIRS suffers from a general lack of oversight79

Poor central management of the database prevents contracting

officials from correcting the flaws discussed above80 In 2005

the Office of Federal Procurement Policy which ldquoguide[s]s

federal agencies in establishing standards for to evaluatinge

past performancerdquo created goals to improve PPIRS81 ldquoThese

goals included standardizing the [PPIRS] ratings and

developing a centralized questionnaire systemrdquo to improve data

consistency82 Years later however these changes still have

not gone into effect and no funding has been dedicated for this

purposeprovided83 Furthermore the incomplete and inaccurate

programs feeding data into PPIRS have not been updated or

corrected84 The result is that PPIRS remains a flawed system

providing minimal assistance to contracting officials to

accurately determine past performance data and failing to help

reduce improper payments

78 Id at 979 Id at 380 See id81 Id82 Id83 Id at 3-484 See Iid at 43

19

Keith Lusby 111112
Had to paraphrase ndash too many almost direct quotes in a row ndash KML

C Excluded Parties List System

The Excluded Parties List System (ldquoEPLSrdquo) maintained by

GSA is the ldquoofficial government-wide system of records of

debarments suspensions[] and other exclusionary actionsrdquo85

Contracting officers are required to review EPLS after opening

bids or receiving proposals and again immediately prior to

contract award to ensure that no award is made to a listed

contractor86 Contracting officers are also required to check

EPLS again prior to awarding ldquonew workrdquo as defined by the FAR87

Like the other systems designed to avoid award of contracts

and payments made to ineligible recipients EPLS suffers from

multiple flaws which have inhibited its efforts at preventing

improper payments a flawed user interface and search

functionality incomplete data and poor management and

oversight

EPLS has been plagued by flawed search functionality and

user interface For instance EPLS lacks significant advanced

search tips as part of its basic search capabilities88 In 85 Frequently Asked Questions EXCLUDED PARTIES LIST SYSTEM httpswwweplsgoveplsjspFAQjsp (last visited Oct 21 2012) 86 Id (citing FAR 9405(d)(1) 9405(d)(4)) 87 Id (citing FAR 9405-1(b)) New work includes exercising options andor otherwise extending the duration of current contracts or orders FAR 9405-1(b) 88 See EXCLUDED PARTIES LIST SYSTEM supra note 2 at 21 US GOVrsquoT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE GAO-09-174 EXCLUDED PARTIES LIST SYSTEM SUSPENDED AND DEBARRED BUSINESSES AND INDIVIDUALS IMPROPERLY RECEIVE FEDERAL FUNDS 21 (2009)GAO-09-174 supra note 2 at 21 EPLS users noted difficulty in finding contractors without being able to use

20

Keith Lusby 111112
Again Irsquom okay with no FN here because the following section addresses these in turn
111112
I think the second part of this footnote should be deleted It mischaracterizes what the far says which is ldquoadd new work exercise options or otherwise extend the duration of current contracts or ordersrdquo I donrsquot think these terms are part of the definition of new work JL I agree with JL that this is a misinterpretation of the FAR It is a separately enumerated restriction not inclusive of the others ndash KML

addition many agencies use automated systems for routine

purchases but EPLS is not compatible with these systems89 Even

after modifications to EPLS businesses excluded for ldquoegregious

offenses have resurface[d] and continue to receive federal

contracts rdquo90

EPLS also requires only a minimal amount of data to be

entered for each action and lacks substantial helpful data

EPLS does not require agencies to include compelling reasons

waivers for suspension or debarment determinations91 or require

data on administrative agreements ndash- which serve as an

alternative to suspension or debarment and keep contractors

eligible for new contract awards mdash- which help contracting

officers in considering new agreements92 While EPLS allows for

unique identification numbers to be recorded many agencies fail

to include this information or simply fill in the field with non-

common search operators such as ldquoandrdquo ldquonotrdquo and ldquoorrdquo Though EPLS added these search operators it still lacks advanced search tips Id at 2389 Id at 1990 Id at 2 (2009) The GAO found that agency officials frequently fail to search EPLS or their searches did not reveal the deficiencies as a result of system flaws Id at 3 Furthermore businesses that are listed as ineligible in EPLS remain listed on the GSA Federal Supply Schedule in violation of the FAR Id at 19 91 The FAR generally excludes suspended or debarred contractors from receiving contracts unless there is a ldquocompelling reasonrdquo FAR 940592 See US GOVrsquoT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE GAO-05-479 FEDERAL PROCUREMENT ADDITIONAL DATA AND REPORTING COULD IMPROVE THE SUSPENSION AND DEBARMENT PROCESS 3 (2005) [hereinafter ADDITIONAL DATA AND REPORTING]

21

Keith Lusby 111112
I added this FN ndash I thought it was important to explain what this was

identifying information93 As a result businesses are able to

circumvent a determination of exclusion by using different

identities94

As with PPIRS and FPDS EPLS suffers from ineffective

control and management95 Under EPLSrsquos structure the suspending

or debarring agency is independently responsible for entering

relevant data leading to inconsistent data entry96 Because

multiple federal agencies enter information this leads to

inconsistent and inaccurate data entry97 In a 2005 review GAO

found that the EPLS data was incomplete out of date and

contained incorrect contact information for a company as a means

for following up and verifying such data98 GSA has no incentive

or enforcement mechanism to ensure that agencies contributing

data to EPLS are doing so in an accurate or timely manner99 As 93 See EXCLUDED PARTIES LIST SYSTEM GAO-09-174 supra note 2 822 at 18 The identifying number typically used is a Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number Id at 2 During the period from June 29 2007 to January 23 2008 GAO found that 38 of the 437 EPLS entries agencies made lacked anno entry in the DUNS field Id at 18 GAO also found that ldquofor 81 additional firms entered into EPLS during the same period the excluding agency entered a DUNS number of ldquorsquo000000000rsquordquo or some other similar non-identifying information Id Therefore 119 firms in totalmdash27 percentmdash lacked an identifiable DUNS number during this seven month periodrdquo Id94 Id at 2 95 See ADDITIONAL DATA AND REPORTING GAO-05-479 supra note 928583 at 4-65 96 Id97 See id98 See generally iId at 13-14id at 13-1699 For example the EPLS website even acknowledges in a disclaimer that it ldquobelieve[s] the information to be reliable the Government does not guarantee the accuracy completeness

22

111112
Put a FN here to Excluded Parties List System available at httpswwweplsgov There is a disclaimer at the bottom that says that GSA is not responsible for errors in the information I have posted this to the portal JLAdded with some explanation ndash KML
111112
I deleted the following sentence because I didnrsquot find that it was substantiated by the source JL I agree that Juliarsquos sentence is bettermore accurate
Keith Lusby 111112
I added that text because there was no explanation as to what a DUNS number eve nwas

a result the data in EPLS is insufficient to ensure excluded

contractors do not unintentionally receive new contracts100

D Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System

The Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information

System (ldquoFAPIISSrdquo) contains specific integrity and performance

information on federal agency contractors and grantees101 FAPIIS

draws most of its data from EPLS PPIRS and CPARS but also

accepts additional data from contracting officers and

contractors102 The Ffederal Ggovernment intended for FAPIIS to

automatically notify the contractor when new information is

posted so that the contractor will have an opportunity to post

comments on the information103

Like the other systems FAPIIS has major flaws that prevent

it from solving the problem of improper payments such as its

timeliness or correct sequencing of the informationrdquo Important Notice ndash System for Award Management EXCLUDED PARTIES LIST SYSTEM httpswwweplsgov (last visited Nov 10 2012)100 See ADDITIONAL DATA AND REPORTING GAO-05-479 supra note 9286 Id at 3101 Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System FAPIIS httpwwwfapiisgov (last visited Oct 21 2012)102 Lorraine M Campos et al Melissa E Beras amp Joelle EK Laszlo FAPIIS Flap-is Transparency Advocates Hate It Now Contractors Likely to Hate It Later GLOBAL REG ULATORY ENFORCEMENT BLOG (June 3 2011)httpwwwglobalregulatoryenforcementlawblogcom201106articlesgovernment-contractsfapiis-flapis-transparency-advocates-hate-it-now-contractors-likely-to-hate-it-later FAPIIS accepts additional data via the Central Contractor Registration database on an ongoing basis IId103 FAR Case 2008-027 Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System 74 Fed Reg 45579 45580 (Sept 3 2009) (proposed rule)

23

search functionality User reviews have referred to FAPIIS as

ldquothe worst government website wersquove ever seenrdquo104 as well as ldquoa

steaming pilerdquo and ldquoa monumental failurerdquo105 Its search

functionality is notably poor Name searches in FAPIIS require

at least 4 characters so users cannot effectively search for a

company that is typically abbreviated such as ldquoIBMrdquo106

Alternatively a search for ldquoLockheed Martinrdquo produces over 300

results of companies and subsidiaries with the same name107 Like

EPLS FAPIIS also struggles to maintain an effective listing of

DUNS numbers for searchability108

Although one of the primary goals of FAPIIS is to provide

contracting officers and contractors an opportunity to comment on

the data being made available for review109 FAPIISrsquos challenging

user interface means it barely achieves this goal110 FAPIIS

104 Tom Lee FAPIIS May Be the Worst Government Website Weve Ever Seen SUNLIGHT FOUND ATION (Apr 19 2011 549 PM) httpsunlightfoundationcomblog20110419fapiis-may-be-the-worst-government-website-weve-ever-seen105 Greg Therkildsen FAPIIS is a Steaming Pile OMB WATCH (Apr 25 2011) httpwwwombwatchorgnode11628 see also Campos supra note 1029492106 Neil Gordon FAPIIS First Impressions PROJECT ON GOVERNMENT OVERSIGHT (Apr 18 2011) httppogoblogtypepadcompogo201104fapiis-first-impressions-html107 Id108 Id When searching for information about IBMrsquos 2008 suspension for example FAPIIS users were unable to ldquotrack down the company using the DUNS number provided in its suspension listingrdquo Id109 See Campos supra note 94110 See Campos supra note 10294

24

contains no guidance to help users figure out potential

problems111 Users have noted significant difficulty in providing

expressed uncertainty on the limits on the parameters regarding

contractors an opportunity to comment and defending themselves

against on reviews being posted about them112 While contractor

comments are supposed to be posted in FAPIIS along with the

Ggovernmentrsquos review it is unclear how many characters the

contractor can use to comment and how quickly a contractor must

act to protest the content so that it may protest the loss of a

contract based on the FAPIIS review of a posted review113 The

result is a huge burden on the contractor bears the weighty

burden of to continuecontinually monitoring the site for updated

reviews of its performance and eligibility114

In addition because FAPIIS draws its data from other

existing systems the content of the data found in FAPIIS is

necessarily incomplete and unreliable Further FAPIIS suffers

from a lack of inter-database communicationcentralization and

accountability115 The system was initially created as ldquoa one-

stop shop for contracting officers to review information about 111 Id112 Campos supra note 9492Id113 Id114 See id115 See Joseph D West et al The Federal Awardee Performance Integrity Information System BRIEFING PAPERS Oct 2011 at 2 Peter J Eyre Public Access to FAPIIS GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS LEGAL FORUM (Apr 15 2011) httpwwwgovernmentcontractslegalforumcom201104articlesreporting-and-disclosurepublic-access-to-fapiis

25

111112
This source does not support the statement I would cite to Joseph D West et al The Federal Awardee Performance amp Integrity Information System Briefing Papers Oct 2011 at 12 I uploaded the source to the portal
111112
Insert the footnote ldquoIdrdquo here ndash the source shows how many different sources provide data JL
Keith Lusby 111112
The language I added is what the source actually says I think the language that the author uses is a bit misleading

prospective contractors business ethics integrity and

performancerdquo116 EPLS and PPIRS are linked to FAPIIS117 so

incomplete data in those systems likely creates the same data

holes in FAPIIS FAPIISrsquos broad scope is also undercut by its

failure to include other databases which have subsequently been

incorporated into the DNP List such as Social Security databases

of ineligible recipients118

II[III] Plagued by the Same Defects The Do Not Pay List

The DNP List is likely to suffer the same fate downfalls as

the existing databases and will fail to create significant

improvements in reducing improper payments The DNP List already

suffers from many of the same common flaws that these other

databases have not been able to overcome Moreover the DNP List

fails to rectify the most important of these recurring problems

(i) incomplete and inaccurate data and (ii) lack of

accountability 116 Peter J Eyre Public Access to FAPIIS GOV rsquo T CONT LEGAL FORUM (Apr 15 2011) httpwwwgovernmentcontractslegalforumcom201104articlesreporting-and-disclosurepublic-access-to-fapiisEyre supra note Id117 FAR Case 2008-027 Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System 75 Fed Reg 1405963 14066 (March 23 2010) (final rule) (codified at FAR pts 2 9 12 42 and 52) see also Matthew Weigelt Homework Describe the Elements that Make Up FAPISS FED ERAL COMPUTER WEE K (May 27 2011 1126 AM) httpfcwcomblogsacquisitive-mind201105fapiis-gao-homework-assignmentaspx118 See Matthew Weigelt Homework Describe the Elements that Make Up FAPISS FEDERAL COMPUTER WEEK (May 27 2011 1126 AM) httpfcwcomblogsacquisitive-mind201105fapiis-gao-homework-assignmentaspxsupra note 117108

26

111112
I would delete this portion ndash it is not substantiated by the source JLNone of this sentence is substantiated and I could not locate another source to substantiate it ndash KML
Keith Lusby 111112
Not sure this is necessary but this is obviously the authorrsquos conclusion but not stated in the source

A The Existing Databases Repeat the Same Mistakes

The existing databases each fail to effectively prevent

federal agencies from paying money to ineligible recipients in

the form of contracts or benefits119 Because each list is only

partially effective the Ggovernment continues to create new

databases with the hope that each will be better than the last

Instead however each existing list is absorbed as a feeder for

a new list120 The most recent list the DNP List is the next

step in this series of failed attempts

Ultimately tThese databases exemplify a pattern of failure

because they each in turn suffer from similar defects which

prevent them from serving as effective tools in reducing improper

payments Each list provides incomplete or inaccurate data

suffers from its own presents a flawed search functionality or

user interface and lacks appropriate oversight and

accountability121 The databases frequently do not communicate

with each other beyond feeding each other incorrect and

incomplete information nor do they communicate with other lists

maintained by other federal agencies122

119 See discussion supra Part II 120 See eg discussion supra Part IID (noting that EPLS and PPIRS are linked to FAPIIS) 121 See discussion supra Part II 122 See discussion supra Part II

27

111112
FN ndash See id
111112
Put a FN here ndash See discussion supra sect2
111112
111112
I would put a FN here ndash See discussion supra sect2

B The Do Not Pay List Does Not Rectify Problems in Existing Lists

The DNP List lacks the necessary accountability because it

does not help agencies identify the root causes of their improper

payments ldquo[A]bout half of all federal agencies have [not]

identified the root causes of their improper paymentsrdquo123 The

Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery Act (IPERIA) the

proposed legislation that would mandateing creation of the DNP

List attempts to penalize agencies for failure to improve their

improper payment rates but the DNP List does not help these

agencies figure out the root cause of the improper payments124

The DNP List does not improve the accountability for data

accuracy beyond that of the previous ineffective databases

Although IPERIA states that ldquoeach agency shall before payment

and award check the following databases to verify

eligibilityrdquo125 this only mandates an existing requirement Each

existing database imposes this requirement often through an

amendment to the FAR requiring contracting officers to check the

123 Jason Miller OMB Hangs Hopes on New Tools to Cut $50B in Improper Payments FED ERAL NEWS RADIO (Feb 8 2012 1003852 AM) httpwwwfederalnewsradiocomnid=513ampsid=2738888 The Department of Health and Human Services which has the largest incidence of improper payments has not met the 2002 improper payments law mandate to determine the root cause of improper payments in eight years Id124 See Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery Improvement Act of 2011 S 1409 sect 5 112th Cong (1st Sess 2011) generally IPERIA S 1409 112th Cong (1st Session) supra note 3233 125 Id at sect 5(a)(2)

28

Keith Lusby 111112
This was never written in full above the line until now

respective list for ineligible recipients or negative past

performance reviews126

In addition like all the databases that came before it

IPERIA notes that a potential recipientrsquos presence on the DNP

List does not require that the person or entity be denied payment

of federal funds127 This vague language leaves the door open for

the DNP List to experience the same user error that plagues the

existing lists when users either fail to check the database

before issuing payment or pay funds to recipients despite their

presence on a list indicating they should not be paid

Another key flaw in the DNP List is that it like the lists

before it does not require contracting officials to rely solely

on the DNP List128 This undermines the goal of the DNP List

serving as the ldquosingle sourcerdquo for agencies129 If contracting

126 See eg FAR 9104-6 (ldquoBefore awarding a contract in excess of the simplified acquisition threshold the contracting officer shall review the FAPIISrdquo)127 S 1409 Id at sect 5(b)(4) ldquoWhen using the Do Not Pay List an agency shall recognize that there may be circumstances under which the law requires a payment or award to be made to a recipient regardless of whether that recipient is on the Do Not Pay Listrdquo Id Furthermore sectionsect 5(f) of the Act calls for the creation of yet another database ndash a database of individuals incarcerated at federal and state facilities Id sect 5(f) The additional database which will only be updated on a weekly basis indicates that the DNP List is not all-inclusive and there is room for the pattern of additional iterative lists to continue being developed as the Ffederal Ggovernment expands the scope of individuals and entities that need to be monitored via database so they do not receive improper payments See Iid 128 See id sect a(2) (noting that ldquoat a minimumrdquo an agency must check five other databases) 129 See FACT SHEET DO NOT PAY LIST supra note 32 at 1

29

111112
Insert FN here to Fact Sheet Do Not Pay List supra note 31 at 1 JLDone ndash KML
111112
Instert FN ndash see eg GoVerify Business Center Preventing and Reducing Improper Payments supra note 38 Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System supra note 94 Both of the sources make this sounds like a site that can be visited but doesnrsquot have to be JLI think the cite I inserted is more pertinent to the discussion ndash KML
111112
I am asking Rachel to identify which portions of the FAR just to add a FN showing this JL Ifound it ndash KML

officials can go elsewhere to verify payments the DNP List does

not have to cannot serve asbe the final word on accurate data

The DNP List also does not address the problem of agenciesrsquo

failure to communicate with each other Privacy issues

frequently prevent agencies from sharing information with one

another that could decrease improper payments130 For example

Social Security and Internal Revenue Service Information is

generally not accessible to other agencies as a source of

identifying information131 Allowing other agencies to access

such information to verify the identity of a potential recipient

of government funds would likely help reduce improper payments

but such access is currently not permitted due to privacy

concerns132 Rather than confront these privacy challenges the

DNP List continues to retrieve information from agencies and

other contractor information databases one at a time

perpetuating this problem133

The DNP Listrsquos lack of oversight and consequences for

failure to cross reference information compounds this information

sharing problem Beginning inAs of fiscal year 2011 ldquoagencies

are required to annually report annually information related to

130 Miller supra note 123110107 Michael OrsquoConnell Agencies Must Work Together to Reduce Improper Payments F EDE RAL NEWS RADIO (Nov 28 2011 1192214 AM) httpwwwfederalnewsradiocomnid=513ampsid=2648525 131 OrsquoConnell supra note 130114111132 Id133 See discussion supra Part IC Id

30

Keith Lusby 111112
The source cited doesnrsquot even discuss the DNP list The ICR I used cites back to the section that dicsusses how its multiple databases that feed into it

tracking and recovery of improper payments to the

improper payments websiterdquo134 At the same time the OMB

guidelines allow an agency that cannot meet the reporting

requirements to request relief by simply explaining why the

agency cannot report this data and how it plans to do so in the

future135 This guideline does not even attempt to address the

recurring problem of agencies failing to make their information

available to other agencies checking the list in a timely manner

and in fact compounds the problem by making allowances for late

data submissions

III[IV] Recommendation A Two-Part Solution

Instead of continuing repeating the cycle pattern of

creating iterative lists that do not effectively combat the

improper payments problem the Ffederal Ggovernment should

consider a novel two-part solution (1) utilizing analytics

technology from the private sector to develop a single working

database with sorting and searching functionality and (2)

imposing sanctions or similar compliance incentives for agencies

issuing award or payment to an entity on the DNP List absent

written justification

A Improving the Do Not Pay List Through Private Sector Analytics

134 REQUIREMENTS FOR IMPLEMENTING EXEC ORDER 13520 OMB M-10-13 supra note 161515 at 14135 OMB M-10-13 supra note 1515 Id at 10

31

The Government government has long acknowledged that there

is a significant technology gap between the Ffederal Ggovernment

and the private sector which contributes to a substantial

productivity gap136 As it has in other contexts the Ffederal

Ggovernment has looked to the public and private sector for

solutions to improper payments137 For example GAO suggested

specific strategies such as control activities risk assessment

and monitoring to reduce improper payments138 However these

proposals have had little practical effect on the Ggovernmentrsquos

improper payment reduction initiatives Rather than adopt a new

approach to managing payments agencies have continued to build

new databases on top of existing ones139

Private sector analytics companies are now tailoring their

technology to meet the needs of various agencies and reduce

errors in fund disbursement systems For instance consulting

companies utilize advanced analytics in the form of predictive

models to quantify the performance of agencyrsquos payables and

procurement data as well as design an automated system to help

prevent erroneous payments by discovering key patterns in the

136 Peter Orszag Director OFFICE OF MGMT AND BUDGET EXEC OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT REMARKS BY PETER R ORSZAG AT CENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS 3-4 (June 8 2010)Peter R Orszag Remarks to the Center for American Progress at 3-4 (June 8 2010) (on file with author) 137 US GOVrsquoT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE GAO-02-69G STRATEGIES TO MANAGE IMPROPER PAYMENTS LEARNING FROM PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTOR ORGANIZATIONS 1 8 (2001) 138 IdSee iId at 10-11139 See discussion supra Part IC

32

111112
But FN here ndash see discussion supra sect2

data140 Many prominent companies have already demonstrated that

technology from the private sector can drastically improve the

Ggovernmentrsquos ability to reduce improper payments141

Some state and local governments have started to take

advantage of advanced analytics demonstrating that the methods

employed in the private sector can and do work to achieve

government goals Other while some agencies have instead tried

to create their own analytics tools with less success For

example the Treasury Department recognizes that data analytics

can help reduce improper payments and is offering its own form of

predictive analysis service Data Analytic Services (DAS) in

conjunction with the DNP List142 DAS is offered for free to

agencies ldquoto help reduce fraud errors[] and payments made

to ineligible recipientsrdquo143 DAS is handled by the DNP Listrsquos

staff at Treasury however rather than provided by a private

analytics company144 Though DAS is still a relatively new

application Treasury has already released multiple updated

versions this year145 but to date has failed to provide any 140 See IBM GLOBAL BUS INESS SERVICE S THE POWER OF ANALYTICS FOR PUBLIC SECTOR BUILDING ANALYTICS COMPETENCY TO ACCELERATE OUTCOMES 2 (2011)141 See eg OVERSIGHT SYSTEM S Addressing the Do Not Payy Mandate Tthrough Automated Technology Continuous Transaction Monitoring 3 (2011) IBM GLOBAL BUS INESS SERVICE S The Power of Analytics for Public Sectorsupra note 140 123 at 2 (2011)142 Data Analytics Services DO NOT PAY httpdonotpaytreasgovdataanalyticshtm143 Id144 See generally GOVERIFY GoVerify Business Center supra note 393837 at 2145 See id at 12

33

Keith Lusby 111112
I moved this FN because the source doesnrsquot say ldquowe have no verifiable resultsrdquo Not suprisignly because the source is made by the creators of GoVerify speak very highly about their program That said I did do a number of searches and couldnrsquot find any data regarding its success I think the second-half of this sentence is fine but I didnrsquot want to suggest that the FN source substantiates the claim
111112
Introductory statement ndash I donrsquot think it needs a FN as the following two paragraphs provide substantiation JLAgreed ndash KML

verifiable results of the programrsquos success Thus Treasuryrsquos

attempt to incorporate its own analytics service into the DNP

List is well-intentioned but fails to achieve the unique

benefits of private sector technology

On the other hand the New York State Department of Taxation

and Finance reduced its improper payments with a program

developed by IBM that used predictive data to allow employees to

process refunds more efficiently146 The tax department processes

24 million business and personal tax returns annually and had

problems determining which refunds should not be paid and which

returns should be audited and investigated147 To help improve

these determinations IBM designed an analytics program to

ldquoleverage information to and transform the departmentrsquos

operationsrdquo148 IBMrsquos plan led to the creation of a new program

which identifies pending tax cases where the outcome may be

questionable149 The automated system which predicts the

questionability of tax returns builds on itself by saving

results of previous cases and adding those to its data rules150

The new system ldquohas saved the state more thanover $889 million

while allowing it to process refunds faster [a]nd

146 IBM GLOBAL BUS INESS SERV VICE S supra note 141123120 at 15147 Id148 Id149 Id150 Id

34

Keith Lusby 111112
I made this change because the sentence as was suggests that these are two separate thigns when I in fact the ldquoleveraging informationrdquo is done in order to transform operatiosn

increas[ing] the percentage of audits that found questionable

refundsrdquo151

Similarly Alameda County Californiarsquos Social Service

Agency also reduced improper payments with IBM analytics152

Alameda County implemented the Social Services Integrated

Reporting System (ldquoSSIRSrdquo) which included built-in analytics but

was also customizable to their unique needs and easy to use153

SSIRS provided more accurate status of clients and their

activities automatic updates sent to case workers and payment

eligibility checks providing an ultimate return on investment of

631 and vastly improving the countyrsquos social services improper

payment issues154

The Ffederal Ggovernment has taken small steps to put

private sector analytics to work in various agencies but only

through individual agencies and not in a government-wide

capacity For example the Department of Defense has been

reducing improper payments with the information technology

company Oversight Systems155 Oversight Systems helped the DoD

implement a unique analytical tool called Business Activity

151 Id152 NUCLEUS RESEARCH ROI CASE STUDY IM BM B SSIRS ALAMEDA COUNTY SOCIAL SERVICES AGENCY 1 (2010)153 See Iid at 2154 Id at 4-5155 Oversight Systems Improper Payments and the IPIA PAYMENT ACCURACY Success Stories httpwwwpaymentaccuracygovcontentsuccess-stories (last visited Nov 10 2012)

35

Monitoring (ldquoBAMrdquo) that flags ldquopotential improper payment

transactions for further closer review before [the transactions]

is are completed and the money is spentrdquo156 This system also

helps identify the conditions that contributed to improper

payment so they can be addressed for the future157 As a result

BAM has prevented an estimated $23 billion in improper payments

since August 2008158

Other agencies including the United States Census Bureau

and the Internal Revenue Service have also sought to reduce

improper payments and reduce fraud through private analytics

companies159 Agencies that have used these services have seen

significant results in the reduction of improper payments as

well as general improvements in recordkeeping and operations160

It is clear that use of private sector analytics on a larger

scale would result in preventing greater numbers of improper

payments made by Ffederal Ggovernment agencies and

156 PAYMENT ACCURACY Success Stories PAYMENT ACCURACY httpwwwpaymentaccuracygovcontentsuccess-stories (last visited Nov 10 2012)157 OVERSIGHT SYSTEMS SYS ADDRESSING THE DO NOT PAY MANDATE THROUGH AUTOMATED TECHNOLOGY 8 (2011) 158 PAYMENT ACCURACY Success Stories supra note 156139135 Press Release Oversight Systems US Department of Defense Selects Oversight Systems to Extend the Oversight BAM Software Program for Improper Payments Reduction and Audit Assertion (May 17 2012)159 PRWeb US Census Bureau Selects Oversight Systems to Monitor Vendor Payments and Excluded Parties PRWEB ( Nov 30 2011) httpwwwprwebcomreleases201111prweb8999975htm (Nov 30 2011last visiting Oct 21 2012)160 See iId

36

111112
The sourceonly referenced the census bureau and not the IRS JL

simultaneously improve the quality of the data being supplied to

the existing databases of ineligible recipients rendering

improvements to the current systems feeding the DNP List161

B Impose Sanctions to Improve Contracting Decisions and Decrease Improper Payments

In order to effectively crack down on improper payments the

Ffederal Ggovernment should sanction agencies that issue an award

or payment to an entity on the DNP List absent written

justification Improper payments persist in part because

agencies are not penalized for this behavior so there is no

incentive to reduce errors162 Agencies that continue to award

contracts and issue improper payments to contractors should be

penalized for this behavior such that they are deterred from

making these improper payments in the future

161 It is also noteworthy that the Ffederal Ggovernment and various prominent institutions maintain similar lists of entities that American companies should avoid doing business with such as (1) Specially Designated Nationals List (Maintained by the US Dept of Treasuryrsquos OFAC) (2)the World Bank Listing of Ineligible Firms and Individuals and (3) US Dept of Commerce Bureau of Industry and Security Denied Persons List See eg THE WORLD BANK World Bank List of Ineligible Firms and Individuals THE WORLD BANK httpwebworldbankorgexternaldefaultmaintheSitePK=84266ampcontentMDK=64069844ampmenuPK=116730amppagePK=64148989amppiPK=64148984 (last visited Oct 21 2012) Though these entities are not designed to reduce the Ffederal Ggovernmentrsquos improper payments they serve analogous roles in various industries and could provide guidance on a more effective database to prevent the payment of funds to ineligible recipients See id162 See Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery Act of 2010 Pub L No 111-204 sect 3(c)(2) 124 Stat 2224 2233

37

111112
Put a FN here to IPERA Pub L No 111-204 sect 3(c) 124 Stat 2224 (2010) supra note 33

Currently IPERA provides for only the most basic

remediation in the event of agency non-compliance with the

statutory requirements163 The Act only requires that if the

agency has not complied it must submit a revised plan outlining

how it will comply164 After two years if the agency is still

found to be non-compliant the OMB Director may find that it

needs additional funds in order to effectuate a plan to become

compliant and may request those funds from Congress165 Thus the

agency that cannot comply with requirements to identify and

attempt to reduce its improper payments may actually get more

money in its budget for failing to operate more efficiently as

required166

There is noIPERIA currently does not create incentives for

agencies to comply especially when improper payments only make

up a relatively small proportion of their total program

disbursements167 IPERIA does not account for agency failure to

comply with its directives and does not appear to contemplate

sanctions of any kind168 Even if formal sanctions cannot be

immediately implemented in these situations the Ffederal 163 Id sect 3(c)(2)(A)IPERA Pub L No 111-204 sect 3(c) 124 Stat 2224 (2010) supra note 3332 164 Id165 Id166 See id167 PAYMENT ACCURACY supra note 1212 In fiscal year 2010 the government-wide improper payment rate was 529 Id168 See Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery Improvement Act of 2011 (IPERIA) S 1409 112th Cong (1st Sess 2011)generally S 1409 112th Cong (1st Session) supra note 3332

38

Ggovernment should contemplate forcing agencies or divisions of

agencies who maintain high improper payment rates to undergo an

evaluation by an outside party Whether this third party is

actually a private sector analytics company or another type of

auditor or consultant federal agencies who fail to comply the

first time cannot be left to their own devices to try again with

more funding The Ffederal Ggovernment must recognize this

problem and take steps to incentivize government agencies to


IV[V] Conclusion

While the DNP List will likely help to eliminate many

instances of improper payments it will not solve the problem to

the degree that President Obama is likely anticipating Instead

of fixing the flaws of previous databases the DNP List receives

data from these incomplete and inaccurate lists Additionally

the DNP List lacks accountability by failing to address the root

cause of such inaccuracies These flaws mean that instead of

providing an effective one-stop solution to improper payments

the DNP List will only continue the cycle of providing

contracting officials with erroneous data

Incorporating private sector analytics technology and

sanctions for noncompliance are necessary to separate the DNP

List from its predecessors Even though Treasury has taken steps

to include its own analytics to the DNP List this is

39

insufficient to provide the individualized problem-solving to

agencies that can make using the DNP List worthwhile Similarly

a sanctions program will incentivize contracting officials to

contribute accurate information to and properly utilize the DNP

List With these changes the Ffederal Ggovernment can make

significant progress at eliminating improper payments

40






II Information Databases Repeatedly Fail to Reduce Improper Payments





III Plagued by the Same Defects The Do Not Pay List



IV Recommendation A Two-Part Solution



V Conclusion

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I The Recent Increase in Improper Payments3A What Are Improper Payments4B Efforts to Reduce Improper Payments65C The Do Not Pay List9D The Do Not Pay List is a Start but Not Enough 1110

II Information Databases Repeatedly Fail to Reduce Improper Payments12A Federal Procurement Data System1413B Past Performance Information Retrieval System1716C Excluded Parties List System2119D Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information

System2422III Plagued by the Same Defects The Do Not Pay List2725

A The Existing Databases Repeat the Same Mistakes 2826B The Do Not Pay List Does Not Rectify Problems in

Existing Lists2926IV Recommendation A Two-Part Solution3330

A Improving the Do Not Pay List Through Private Sector Analytics3330

B Impose Sanctions to Improve Contracting Decisions and Decrease Improper Payments3936

V Conclusion4038

i

















Keith Lusby 111112



















2

Keith Lusby 111112






















3

Keith Lusby 111112
















4

111112
111112



















5

111112
















6

Keith Lusby 111112
111112







201227












7

Keith Lusby 111112
Keith Lusby 111112












8

111112
Rodney 111112

















9

Keith Lusby 111112












10

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112




of $125 billion43













11

111112
111112
111112



















12

111112
Keith Lusby 111112
I added this FN
111112
Keith Lusby 111112

















13

Keith Lusby 111112
111112
111112
111112
111112


accuracy56








14

Keith Lusby 111112




erroneously60










files64





15

111112

















16







oversight












17

Keith Lusby 111112












measures75








18

Keith Lusby 111112


a given award78


















19

Keith Lusby 111112















oversight




20

Keith Lusby 111112
111112





contracts rdquo90












21

Keith Lusby 111112



identities94












22

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112
















23
















24




















25

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112

















26

111112
Keith Lusby 111112





















27

111112
FN ndash See id
111112
111112
111112



















28

Keith Lusby 111112
















29

111112
111112
111112






















30

Keith Lusby 111112










data submissions













31





















32

111112



















33

Keith Lusby 111112
111112






















34

Keith Lusby 111112


refundsrdquo151










payment issues154









35


















36

111112















37

111112












required166








38










IV[V] Conclusion















39







40

















V Conclusion

















Keith Lusby 111112



















2

Keith Lusby 111112






















3

Keith Lusby 111112
















4

111112
111112



















5

111112
















6

Keith Lusby 111112
111112







201227












7

Keith Lusby 111112
Keith Lusby 111112












8

111112
Rodney 111112

















9

Keith Lusby 111112












10

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112




of $125 billion43













11

111112
111112
111112



















12

111112
Keith Lusby 111112
I added this FN
111112
Keith Lusby 111112

















13

Keith Lusby 111112
111112
111112
111112
111112


accuracy56








14

Keith Lusby 111112




erroneously60










files64





15

111112

















16







oversight












17

Keith Lusby 111112












measures75








18

Keith Lusby 111112


a given award78


















19

Keith Lusby 111112















oversight




20

Keith Lusby 111112
111112





contracts rdquo90












21

Keith Lusby 111112



identities94












22

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112
















23
















24




















25

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112

















26

111112
Keith Lusby 111112





















27

111112
FN ndash See id
111112
111112
111112



















28

Keith Lusby 111112
















29

111112
111112
111112






















30

Keith Lusby 111112










data submissions













31





















32

111112



















33

Keith Lusby 111112
111112






















34

Keith Lusby 111112


refundsrdquo151










payment issues154









35


















36

111112















37

111112












required166








38










IV[V] Conclusion















39







40

















V Conclusion



















2

Keith Lusby 111112






















3

Keith Lusby 111112
















4

111112
111112



















5

111112
















6

Keith Lusby 111112
111112







201227












7

Keith Lusby 111112
Keith Lusby 111112












8

111112
Rodney 111112

















9

Keith Lusby 111112












10

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112




of $125 billion43













11

111112
111112
111112



















12

111112
Keith Lusby 111112
I added this FN
111112
Keith Lusby 111112

















13

Keith Lusby 111112
111112
111112
111112
111112


accuracy56








14

Keith Lusby 111112




erroneously60










files64





15

111112

















16







oversight












17

Keith Lusby 111112












measures75








18

Keith Lusby 111112


a given award78


















19

Keith Lusby 111112















oversight




20

Keith Lusby 111112
111112





contracts rdquo90












21

Keith Lusby 111112



identities94












22

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112
















23
















24




















25

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112

















26

111112
Keith Lusby 111112





















27

111112
FN ndash See id
111112
111112
111112



















28

Keith Lusby 111112
















29

111112
111112
111112






















30

Keith Lusby 111112










data submissions













31





















32

111112



















33

Keith Lusby 111112
111112






















34

Keith Lusby 111112


refundsrdquo151










payment issues154









35


















36

111112















37

111112












required166








38










IV[V] Conclusion















39







40

















V Conclusion






















3

Keith Lusby 111112
















4

111112
111112



















5

111112
















6

Keith Lusby 111112
111112







201227












7

Keith Lusby 111112
Keith Lusby 111112












8

111112
Rodney 111112

















9

Keith Lusby 111112












10

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112




of $125 billion43













11

111112
111112
111112



















12

111112
Keith Lusby 111112
I added this FN
111112
Keith Lusby 111112

















13

Keith Lusby 111112
111112
111112
111112
111112


accuracy56








14

Keith Lusby 111112




erroneously60










files64





15

111112

















16







oversight












17

Keith Lusby 111112












measures75








18

Keith Lusby 111112


a given award78


















19

Keith Lusby 111112















oversight




20

Keith Lusby 111112
111112





contracts rdquo90












21

Keith Lusby 111112



identities94












22

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112
















23
















24




















25

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112

















26

111112
Keith Lusby 111112





















27

111112
FN ndash See id
111112
111112
111112



















28

Keith Lusby 111112
















29

111112
111112
111112






















30

Keith Lusby 111112










data submissions













31





















32

111112



















33

Keith Lusby 111112
111112






















34

Keith Lusby 111112


refundsrdquo151










payment issues154









35


















36

111112















37

111112












required166








38










IV[V] Conclusion















39







40

















V Conclusion
















4

111112
111112



















5

111112
















6

Keith Lusby 111112
111112







201227












7

Keith Lusby 111112
Keith Lusby 111112












8

111112
Rodney 111112

















9

Keith Lusby 111112












10

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112




of $125 billion43













11

111112
111112
111112



















12

111112
Keith Lusby 111112
I added this FN
111112
Keith Lusby 111112

















13

Keith Lusby 111112
111112
111112
111112
111112


accuracy56








14

Keith Lusby 111112




erroneously60










files64





15

111112

















16







oversight












17

Keith Lusby 111112












measures75








18

Keith Lusby 111112


a given award78


















19

Keith Lusby 111112















oversight




20

Keith Lusby 111112
111112





contracts rdquo90












21

Keith Lusby 111112



identities94












22

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112
















23
















24




















25

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112

















26

111112
Keith Lusby 111112





















27

111112
FN ndash See id
111112
111112
111112



















28

Keith Lusby 111112
















29

111112
111112
111112






















30

Keith Lusby 111112










data submissions













31





















32

111112



















33

Keith Lusby 111112
111112






















34

Keith Lusby 111112


refundsrdquo151










payment issues154









35


















36

111112















37

111112












required166








38










IV[V] Conclusion















39







40

















V Conclusion



















5

111112
















6

Keith Lusby 111112
111112







201227












7

Keith Lusby 111112
Keith Lusby 111112












8

111112
Rodney 111112

















9

Keith Lusby 111112












10

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112




of $125 billion43













11

111112
111112
111112



















12

111112
Keith Lusby 111112
I added this FN
111112
Keith Lusby 111112

















13

Keith Lusby 111112
111112
111112
111112
111112


accuracy56








14

Keith Lusby 111112




erroneously60










files64





15

111112

















16







oversight












17

Keith Lusby 111112












measures75








18

Keith Lusby 111112


a given award78


















19

Keith Lusby 111112















oversight




20

Keith Lusby 111112
111112





contracts rdquo90












21

Keith Lusby 111112



identities94












22

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112
















23
















24




















25

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112

















26

111112
Keith Lusby 111112





















27

111112
FN ndash See id
111112
111112
111112



















28

Keith Lusby 111112
















29

111112
111112
111112






















30

Keith Lusby 111112










data submissions













31





















32

111112



















33

Keith Lusby 111112
111112






















34

Keith Lusby 111112


refundsrdquo151










payment issues154









35


















36

111112















37

111112












required166








38










IV[V] Conclusion















39







40

















V Conclusion
















6

Keith Lusby 111112
111112







201227












7

Keith Lusby 111112
Keith Lusby 111112












8

111112
Rodney 111112

















9

Keith Lusby 111112












10

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112




of $125 billion43













11

111112
111112
111112



















12

111112
Keith Lusby 111112
I added this FN
111112
Keith Lusby 111112

















13

Keith Lusby 111112
111112
111112
111112
111112


accuracy56








14

Keith Lusby 111112




erroneously60










files64





15

111112

















16







oversight












17

Keith Lusby 111112












measures75








18

Keith Lusby 111112


a given award78


















19

Keith Lusby 111112















oversight




20

Keith Lusby 111112
111112





contracts rdquo90












21

Keith Lusby 111112



identities94












22

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112
















23
















24




















25

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112

















26

111112
Keith Lusby 111112





















27

111112
FN ndash See id
111112
111112
111112



















28

Keith Lusby 111112
















29

111112
111112
111112






















30

Keith Lusby 111112










data submissions













31





















32

111112



















33

Keith Lusby 111112
111112






















34

Keith Lusby 111112


refundsrdquo151










payment issues154









35


















36

111112















37

111112












required166








38










IV[V] Conclusion















39







40

















V Conclusion







201227












7

Keith Lusby 111112
Keith Lusby 111112












8

111112
Rodney 111112

















9

Keith Lusby 111112












10

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112




of $125 billion43













11

111112
111112
111112



















12

111112
Keith Lusby 111112
I added this FN
111112
Keith Lusby 111112

















13

Keith Lusby 111112
111112
111112
111112
111112


accuracy56








14

Keith Lusby 111112




erroneously60










files64





15

111112

















16







oversight












17

Keith Lusby 111112












measures75








18

Keith Lusby 111112


a given award78


















19

Keith Lusby 111112















oversight




20

Keith Lusby 111112
111112





contracts rdquo90












21

Keith Lusby 111112



identities94












22

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112
















23
















24




















25

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112

















26

111112
Keith Lusby 111112





















27

111112
FN ndash See id
111112
111112
111112



















28

Keith Lusby 111112
















29

111112
111112
111112






















30

Keith Lusby 111112










data submissions













31





















32

111112



















33

Keith Lusby 111112
111112






















34

Keith Lusby 111112


refundsrdquo151










payment issues154









35


















36

111112















37

111112












required166








38










IV[V] Conclusion















39







40

















V Conclusion












8

111112
Rodney 111112

















9

Keith Lusby 111112












10

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112




of $125 billion43













11

111112
111112
111112



















12

111112
Keith Lusby 111112
I added this FN
111112
Keith Lusby 111112

















13

Keith Lusby 111112
111112
111112
111112
111112


accuracy56








14

Keith Lusby 111112




erroneously60










files64





15

111112

















16







oversight












17

Keith Lusby 111112












measures75








18

Keith Lusby 111112


a given award78


















19

Keith Lusby 111112















oversight




20

Keith Lusby 111112
111112





contracts rdquo90












21

Keith Lusby 111112



identities94












22

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112
















23
















24




















25

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112

















26

111112
Keith Lusby 111112





















27

111112
FN ndash See id
111112
111112
111112



















28

Keith Lusby 111112
















29

111112
111112
111112






















30

Keith Lusby 111112










data submissions













31





















32

111112



















33

Keith Lusby 111112
111112






















34

Keith Lusby 111112


refundsrdquo151










payment issues154









35


















36

111112















37

111112












required166








38










IV[V] Conclusion















39







40

















V Conclusion

















9

Keith Lusby 111112












10

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112




of $125 billion43













11

111112
111112
111112



















12

111112
Keith Lusby 111112
I added this FN
111112
Keith Lusby 111112

















13

Keith Lusby 111112
111112
111112
111112
111112


accuracy56








14

Keith Lusby 111112




erroneously60










files64





15

111112

















16







oversight












17

Keith Lusby 111112












measures75








18

Keith Lusby 111112


a given award78


















19

Keith Lusby 111112















oversight




20

Keith Lusby 111112
111112





contracts rdquo90












21

Keith Lusby 111112



identities94












22

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112
















23
















24




















25

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112

















26

111112
Keith Lusby 111112





















27

111112
FN ndash See id
111112
111112
111112



















28

Keith Lusby 111112
















29

111112
111112
111112






















30

Keith Lusby 111112










data submissions













31





















32

111112



















33

Keith Lusby 111112
111112






















34

Keith Lusby 111112


refundsrdquo151










payment issues154









35


















36

111112















37

111112












required166








38










IV[V] Conclusion















39







40

















V Conclusion












10

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112




of $125 billion43













11

111112
111112
111112



















12

111112
Keith Lusby 111112
I added this FN
111112
Keith Lusby 111112

















13

Keith Lusby 111112
111112
111112
111112
111112


accuracy56








14

Keith Lusby 111112




erroneously60










files64





15

111112

















16







oversight












17

Keith Lusby 111112












measures75








18

Keith Lusby 111112


a given award78


















19

Keith Lusby 111112















oversight




20

Keith Lusby 111112
111112





contracts rdquo90












21

Keith Lusby 111112



identities94












22

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112
















23
















24




















25

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112

















26

111112
Keith Lusby 111112





















27

111112
FN ndash See id
111112
111112
111112



















28

Keith Lusby 111112
















29

111112
111112
111112






















30

Keith Lusby 111112










data submissions













31





















32

111112



















33

Keith Lusby 111112
111112






















34

Keith Lusby 111112


refundsrdquo151










payment issues154









35


















36

111112















37

111112












required166








38










IV[V] Conclusion















39







40

















V Conclusion




of $125 billion43













11

111112
111112
111112



















12

111112
Keith Lusby 111112
I added this FN
111112
Keith Lusby 111112

















13

Keith Lusby 111112
111112
111112
111112
111112


accuracy56








14

Keith Lusby 111112




erroneously60










files64





15

111112

















16







oversight












17

Keith Lusby 111112












measures75








18

Keith Lusby 111112


a given award78


















19

Keith Lusby 111112















oversight




20

Keith Lusby 111112
111112





contracts rdquo90












21

Keith Lusby 111112



identities94












22

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112
















23
















24




















25

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112

















26

111112
Keith Lusby 111112





















27

111112
FN ndash See id
111112
111112
111112



















28

Keith Lusby 111112
















29

111112
111112
111112






















30

Keith Lusby 111112










data submissions













31





















32

111112



















33

Keith Lusby 111112
111112






















34

Keith Lusby 111112


refundsrdquo151










payment issues154









35


















36

111112















37

111112












required166








38










IV[V] Conclusion















39







40

















V Conclusion



















12

111112
Keith Lusby 111112
I added this FN
111112
Keith Lusby 111112

















13

Keith Lusby 111112
111112
111112
111112
111112


accuracy56








14

Keith Lusby 111112




erroneously60










files64





15

111112

















16







oversight












17

Keith Lusby 111112












measures75








18

Keith Lusby 111112


a given award78


















19

Keith Lusby 111112















oversight




20

Keith Lusby 111112
111112





contracts rdquo90












21

Keith Lusby 111112



identities94












22

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112
















23
















24




















25

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112

















26

111112
Keith Lusby 111112





















27

111112
FN ndash See id
111112
111112
111112



















28

Keith Lusby 111112
















29

111112
111112
111112






















30

Keith Lusby 111112










data submissions













31





















32

111112



















33

Keith Lusby 111112
111112






















34

Keith Lusby 111112


refundsrdquo151










payment issues154









35


















36

111112















37

111112












required166








38










IV[V] Conclusion















39







40

















V Conclusion

















13

Keith Lusby 111112
111112
111112
111112
111112


accuracy56








14

Keith Lusby 111112




erroneously60










files64





15

111112

















16







oversight












17

Keith Lusby 111112












measures75








18

Keith Lusby 111112


a given award78


















19

Keith Lusby 111112















oversight




20

Keith Lusby 111112
111112





contracts rdquo90












21

Keith Lusby 111112



identities94












22

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112
















23
















24




















25

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112

















26

111112
Keith Lusby 111112





















27

111112
FN ndash See id
111112
111112
111112



















28

Keith Lusby 111112
















29

111112
111112
111112






















30

Keith Lusby 111112










data submissions













31





















32

111112



















33

Keith Lusby 111112
111112






















34

Keith Lusby 111112


refundsrdquo151










payment issues154









35


















36

111112















37

111112












required166








38










IV[V] Conclusion















39







40

















V Conclusion


accuracy56








14

Keith Lusby 111112




erroneously60










files64





15

111112

















16







oversight












17

Keith Lusby 111112












measures75








18

Keith Lusby 111112


a given award78


















19

Keith Lusby 111112















oversight




20

Keith Lusby 111112
111112





contracts rdquo90












21

Keith Lusby 111112



identities94












22

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112
















23
















24




















25

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112

















26

111112
Keith Lusby 111112





















27

111112
FN ndash See id
111112
111112
111112



















28

Keith Lusby 111112
















29

111112
111112
111112






















30

Keith Lusby 111112










data submissions













31





















32

111112



















33

Keith Lusby 111112
111112






















34

Keith Lusby 111112


refundsrdquo151










payment issues154









35


















36

111112















37

111112












required166








38










IV[V] Conclusion















39







40

















V Conclusion




erroneously60










files64





15

111112

















16







oversight












17

Keith Lusby 111112












measures75








18

Keith Lusby 111112


a given award78


















19

Keith Lusby 111112















oversight




20

Keith Lusby 111112
111112





contracts rdquo90












21

Keith Lusby 111112



identities94












22

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112
















23
















24




















25

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112

















26

111112
Keith Lusby 111112





















27

111112
FN ndash See id
111112
111112
111112



















28

Keith Lusby 111112
















29

111112
111112
111112






















30

Keith Lusby 111112










data submissions













31





















32

111112



















33

Keith Lusby 111112
111112






















34

Keith Lusby 111112


refundsrdquo151










payment issues154









35


















36

111112















37

111112












required166








38










IV[V] Conclusion















39







40

















V Conclusion

















16







oversight












17

Keith Lusby 111112












measures75








18

Keith Lusby 111112


a given award78


















19

Keith Lusby 111112















oversight




20

Keith Lusby 111112
111112





contracts rdquo90












21

Keith Lusby 111112



identities94












22

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112
















23
















24




















25

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112

















26

111112
Keith Lusby 111112





















27

111112
FN ndash See id
111112
111112
111112



















28

Keith Lusby 111112
















29

111112
111112
111112






















30

Keith Lusby 111112










data submissions













31





















32

111112



















33

Keith Lusby 111112
111112






















34

Keith Lusby 111112


refundsrdquo151










payment issues154









35


















36

111112















37

111112












required166








38










IV[V] Conclusion















39







40

















V Conclusion







oversight












17

Keith Lusby 111112












measures75








18

Keith Lusby 111112


a given award78


















19

Keith Lusby 111112















oversight




20

Keith Lusby 111112
111112





contracts rdquo90












21

Keith Lusby 111112



identities94












22

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112
















23
















24




















25

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112

















26

111112
Keith Lusby 111112





















27

111112
FN ndash See id
111112
111112
111112



















28

Keith Lusby 111112
















29

111112
111112
111112






















30

Keith Lusby 111112










data submissions













31





















32

111112



















33

Keith Lusby 111112
111112






















34

Keith Lusby 111112


refundsrdquo151










payment issues154









35


















36

111112















37

111112












required166








38










IV[V] Conclusion















39







40

















V Conclusion












measures75








18

Keith Lusby 111112


a given award78


















19

Keith Lusby 111112















oversight




20

Keith Lusby 111112
111112





contracts rdquo90












21

Keith Lusby 111112



identities94












22

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112
















23
















24




















25

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112

















26

111112
Keith Lusby 111112





















27

111112
FN ndash See id
111112
111112
111112



















28

Keith Lusby 111112
















29

111112
111112
111112






















30

Keith Lusby 111112










data submissions













31





















32

111112



















33

Keith Lusby 111112
111112






















34

Keith Lusby 111112


refundsrdquo151










payment issues154









35


















36

111112















37

111112












required166








38










IV[V] Conclusion















39







40

















V Conclusion


a given award78


















19

Keith Lusby 111112















oversight




20

Keith Lusby 111112
111112





contracts rdquo90












21

Keith Lusby 111112



identities94












22

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112
















23
















24




















25

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112

















26

111112
Keith Lusby 111112





















27

111112
FN ndash See id
111112
111112
111112



















28

Keith Lusby 111112
















29

111112
111112
111112






















30

Keith Lusby 111112










data submissions













31





















32

111112



















33

Keith Lusby 111112
111112






















34

Keith Lusby 111112


refundsrdquo151










payment issues154









35


















36

111112















37

111112












required166








38










IV[V] Conclusion















39







40

















V Conclusion















oversight




20

Keith Lusby 111112
111112





contracts rdquo90












21

Keith Lusby 111112



identities94












22

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112
















23
















24




















25

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112

















26

111112
Keith Lusby 111112





















27

111112
FN ndash See id
111112
111112
111112



















28

Keith Lusby 111112
















29

111112
111112
111112






















30

Keith Lusby 111112










data submissions













31





















32

111112



















33

Keith Lusby 111112
111112






















34

Keith Lusby 111112


refundsrdquo151










payment issues154









35


















36

111112















37

111112












required166








38










IV[V] Conclusion















39







40

















V Conclusion





contracts rdquo90












21

Keith Lusby 111112



identities94












22

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112
















23
















24




















25

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112

















26

111112
Keith Lusby 111112





















27

111112
FN ndash See id
111112
111112
111112



















28

Keith Lusby 111112
















29

111112
111112
111112






















30

Keith Lusby 111112










data submissions













31





















32

111112



















33

Keith Lusby 111112
111112






















34

Keith Lusby 111112


refundsrdquo151










payment issues154









35


















36

111112















37

111112












required166








38










IV[V] Conclusion















39







40

















V Conclusion



identities94












22

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112
















23
















24




















25

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112

















26

111112
Keith Lusby 111112





















27

111112
FN ndash See id
111112
111112
111112



















28

Keith Lusby 111112
















29

111112
111112
111112






















30

Keith Lusby 111112










data submissions













31





















32

111112



















33

Keith Lusby 111112
111112






















34

Keith Lusby 111112


refundsrdquo151










payment issues154









35


















36

111112















37

111112












required166








38










IV[V] Conclusion















39







40

















V Conclusion
















23
















24




















25

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112

















26

111112
Keith Lusby 111112





















27

111112
FN ndash See id
111112
111112
111112



















28

Keith Lusby 111112
















29

111112
111112
111112






















30

Keith Lusby 111112










data submissions













31





















32

111112



















33

Keith Lusby 111112
111112






















34

Keith Lusby 111112


refundsrdquo151










payment issues154









35


















36

111112















37

111112












required166








38










IV[V] Conclusion















39







40

















V Conclusion
















24




















25

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112

















26

111112
Keith Lusby 111112





















27

111112
FN ndash See id
111112
111112
111112



















28

Keith Lusby 111112
















29

111112
111112
111112






















30

Keith Lusby 111112










data submissions













31





















32

111112



















33

Keith Lusby 111112
111112






















34

Keith Lusby 111112


refundsrdquo151










payment issues154









35


















36

111112















37

111112












required166








38










IV[V] Conclusion















39







40

















V Conclusion




















25

111112
111112
Keith Lusby 111112

















26

111112
Keith Lusby 111112





















27

111112
FN ndash See id
111112
111112
111112



















28

Keith Lusby 111112
















29

111112
111112
111112






















30

Keith Lusby 111112










data submissions













31





















32

111112



















33

Keith Lusby 111112
111112






















34

Keith Lusby 111112


refundsrdquo151










payment issues154









35


















36

111112















37

111112












required166








38










IV[V] Conclusion















39







40

















V Conclusion

















26

111112
Keith Lusby 111112





















27

111112
FN ndash See id
111112
111112
111112



















28

Keith Lusby 111112
















29

111112
111112
111112






















30

Keith Lusby 111112










data submissions













31





















32

111112



















33

Keith Lusby 111112
111112






















34

Keith Lusby 111112


refundsrdquo151










payment issues154









35


















36

111112















37

111112












required166








38










IV[V] Conclusion















39







40

















V Conclusion





















27

111112
FN ndash See id
111112
111112
111112



















28

Keith Lusby 111112
















29

111112
111112
111112






















30

Keith Lusby 111112










data submissions













31





















32

111112



















33

Keith Lusby 111112
111112






















34

Keith Lusby 111112


refundsrdquo151










payment issues154









35


















36

111112















37

111112












required166








38










IV[V] Conclusion















39







40

















V Conclusion



















28

Keith Lusby 111112
















29

111112
111112
111112






















30

Keith Lusby 111112










data submissions













31





















32

111112



















33

Keith Lusby 111112
111112






















34

Keith Lusby 111112


refundsrdquo151










payment issues154









35


















36

111112















37

111112












required166








38










IV[V] Conclusion















39







40

















V Conclusion
















29

111112
111112
111112






















30

Keith Lusby 111112










data submissions













31





















32

111112



















33

Keith Lusby 111112
111112






















34

Keith Lusby 111112


refundsrdquo151










payment issues154









35


















36

111112















37

111112












required166








38










IV[V] Conclusion















39







40

















V Conclusion






















30

Keith Lusby 111112










data submissions













31





















32

111112



















33

Keith Lusby 111112
111112






















34

Keith Lusby 111112


refundsrdquo151










payment issues154









35


















36

111112















37

111112












required166








38










IV[V] Conclusion















39







40

















V Conclusion










data submissions













31





















32

111112



















33

Keith Lusby 111112
111112






















34

Keith Lusby 111112


refundsrdquo151










payment issues154









35


















36

111112















37

111112












required166








38










IV[V] Conclusion















39







40

















V Conclusion





















32

111112



















33

Keith Lusby 111112
111112






















34

Keith Lusby 111112


refundsrdquo151










payment issues154









35


















36

111112















37

111112












required166








38










IV[V] Conclusion















39







40

















V Conclusion



















33

Keith Lusby 111112
111112






















34

Keith Lusby 111112


refundsrdquo151










payment issues154









35


















36

111112















37

111112












required166








38










IV[V] Conclusion















39







40

















V Conclusion






















34

Keith Lusby 111112


refundsrdquo151










payment issues154









35


















36

111112















37

111112












required166








38










IV[V] Conclusion















39







40

















V Conclusion


refundsrdquo151










payment issues154









35


















36

111112















37

111112












required166








38










IV[V] Conclusion















39







40

















V Conclusion


















36

111112















37

111112












required166








38










IV[V] Conclusion















39







40

















V Conclusion















37

111112












required166








38










IV[V] Conclusion















39







40

















V Conclusion












required166








38










IV[V] Conclusion















39







40

















V Conclusion










IV[V] Conclusion















39







40

















V Conclusion







40

















V Conclusion

pclj.orgpclj.org/.../2/files/2012/10/dda6e1d55a52e09ce8a866b8b… · web viewto pay, or not to...

Documents