1
/
of
1
ReadCycle
Improvements Needed in U.S. Special Operations Command Global Battlestaff and Program Support Contract Oversight
Improvements Needed in U.S. Special Operations Command Global Battlestaff and Program Support Contract Oversight
Regular price
$2.99 USD
Regular price
Sale price
$2.99 USD
Shipping calculated at checkout.
Quantity
Couldn't load pickup availability
This report focuses on the U.S. Special Operations
Command (USSOCOM) Global Battlestaff and
Program Support (GBPS) contract. For this audit, we
determined whether USSOCOM properly
administered task orders awarded under the GBPS
contract, valued at approximately $231 million, as of
November 16, 2011
USSOCOM contracting officers did not properly
administer GBPS task orders in accordance with
Federal guidance. For the 28 task orders reviewed,
contracting officers awarded 26 task orders with
unclear requirements, 24 task orders that did not
always have measureable outcomes, 9 task orders that
may have included inherently governmental duties,
and 24 task orders with elements of a personal
services contract. This occurred because contracting
officers did not ensure task order terms complied with
Federal Acquisition Regulation requirements to
include clear, specific, and objective terms with
measurable outcomes or review task orders for
inherently governmental functions and elements of a
personal services contract. USSOCOM personnel
preferred unclear task order requirements to maintain
flexibility and to support emerging tasks
Command (USSOCOM) Global Battlestaff and
Program Support (GBPS) contract. For this audit, we
determined whether USSOCOM properly
administered task orders awarded under the GBPS
contract, valued at approximately $231 million, as of
November 16, 2011
USSOCOM contracting officers did not properly
administer GBPS task orders in accordance with
Federal guidance. For the 28 task orders reviewed,
contracting officers awarded 26 task orders with
unclear requirements, 24 task orders that did not
always have measureable outcomes, 9 task orders that
may have included inherently governmental duties,
and 24 task orders with elements of a personal
services contract. This occurred because contracting
officers did not ensure task order terms complied with
Federal Acquisition Regulation requirements to
include clear, specific, and objective terms with
measurable outcomes or review task orders for
inherently governmental functions and elements of a
personal services contract. USSOCOM personnel
preferred unclear task order requirements to maintain
flexibility and to support emerging tasks
Share
