Normal view MARC view ISBD view

Iraq and Afghanistan :

Catalog Source (منبع کتلاگ):

ACKU

Statement of responsibility:

United States Government Accountability Office (GAO).

Publication/Distribution (Imprint):

Washington, DC : United States Government Accountability Office (GAO), 2010.

Physical Description:

v, 67 p. ; 30 cm.

Subjects--Topical Terms:

Public contracts
Management.
United States
Defense contracts
Management.
United States
Government contractors
United States.
Interagency coordination
United States.

Subjects--Geographic Terms:

,United States. Department of Defense -- Management -- Evaluation.

Subjects--Geographic Terms:

,United States. Agency for International Development -- Management -- Evaluation.

Subjects--Geographic Terms:

,United States. Department of State -- Management -- Evaluation.

LC Class. No:

Pamphlet HD3861. / U6. / I73 2010

Source of Classification:

Library of Congress Classification / Monograph

Accession No:

3ACKU000354463

General Note:

Cover title.
“October 2010”.

General Note:

“Report to congressional committees”—at head of title.
“GAO-11-1 ; Accountability, Integrity, Reliability”—cover page.

General Note:

Abstract: The Departments of Defense (DOD) and State and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) have relied extensively on contracts, grants, and cooperative agreements for a wide range of services in Afghanistan and Iraq. However, as GAO previously reported, the agencies have faced challenges in obtaining sufficient information to manage these contracts and assistance instruments. As part of our third review under the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year (FY) 2008, as amended, GAO assessed the implementation of the Synchronized Predeployment and Operational Tracker (SPOT) and data reported by the three agencies for Afghanistan and Iraq for FY 2009 and the first half of FY 2010 on the (1) number of contractor and assistance personnel, including those providing security; (2) number of personnel killed or wounded; and (3) number and value of contracts and assistance instruments and extent of competition for new awards. GAO compared agency data to other available sources to assess reliability. In response to GAO's 2009 report, DOD, State, and USAID did not agree with the recommendation to develop a plan for implementing SPOT because they felt ongoing coordination efforts were sufficient. GAO continues to believe a plan is needed to correct SPOT's shortcomings and is not making any new recommendations.