First off, I want to thank all the contractors who are sending tips to POGO and the IG and revealing what is really going on with this contract. POGO will gladly take whatever you got, if it is pertinent to the embassy contract. If the company or DoS does not want to do the right thing with this contract and take care of their people or manage the contract properly, then I say report it.
I also want to bring up a tidbit that one of the media rags brought up, that I thought was telling. Here is the quote:
A footnote buried in the report suggests that Triple Canopy officials may have tried to impede State Department investigators from getting the full story. Prior to a site visit by IG investigators, according to the report, Triple Canopy’s Iraq program manager, deputy program manager, and guard force commander coached the company’s guards on how they should respond to questions about working conditions and other matters. They circulated a memo containing “Pre-Inspection Guidance” that warned the guards about saying too much and contained what appears to be a thinly veiled threat:
“Answer to break question for guards is 15 minutes morning, 30 minutes lunch, and 15 minutes afternoon. DO NOT SAY: “I do not have a relief supervisor today.” Instead, and only if asked, I am sharing a relief supervisor with (name other venue). Do not elaborate on answers to inspectors questions. Answer only the questions. What you say can and will be used against you.”
If there is any question at all about how ineffective ‘open inspections that are broadcasted’ are, this would be it. Managers of companies will obviously prep their people to answer the inspector’s questions, so that it will make the company look good or hide issues. If inspectors want to know what is really going on, they either need to do surprise inspections or use mystery employees. Another way is to just have a toll free number or email that contractors can use anonymously. I would also have that information accessible by multiple inspectors, so that one inspector can’t just sweep that information under the rug and not do anything about it. Another idea is for contractors to just CC emails, and put POGO on that list, as well as multiple inspectors–just so everyone knows ‘that everyone knows’. I guess my point is, is if DoS really cares about what is going on with the contract, there are all sorts of ways of figuring out the real deal.
I also want to talk about living quarters and english proficiency. I totally agree that if the contract states that contractors must have a certain standard for living quarters, then that standard should be met. TC and DoS are both at fault there for not caring about their contractors.
With that said, it is a war zone and living in poor conditions kind of comes with the territory on some contracts. I looked at the pictures that POGO put up, and that actually looks pretty standard for many contracts out there. Hell, to some folks, I am sure those quarters looked pretty good. There are contracts out there where guys are living in tents or whatever they can find, and that just comes with the job.
But in light of the Adam Hermanson death, where he was electrocuted in a shower do to faulty wiring, you would think that TC and DoS would have insured that living quarters were up to contract standards.
I will disagree with the live wire thing that POGO brought up in the pictures. Those are power chords, and guys string up power chords all over the place in these barracks. They have to if they want to get some juice for their computers and TVs. So I think that comment about ‘live wires’ was kind of stupid. Hell, they sell power strips and power chords in the PX of bases all over Iraq, and they are used by contractors and soldiers, and in all sorts of ways.
For english standards, I agree that all guards must speak english–if it is mandated by the contract. But let me yet again interject some reality into this conversation. If most of our private security forces are local nationals in this war, and troops and contractors are working side by side with those local nationals, then it would stand to reason that you would have situations where folks do not know how to speak english or communicate with supervisors or NCO’s and Officers. In a perfect world, everyone would speak english, but that just is not the case in this war. That is why it is not a shock to me, that guys would not know how to speak english for a static security assignment like at the embassy(even if they are from Uganda or Peru or where ever). I am sure many of the local nationals who work on the embassy compound do not speak english either. I agree that it would be nice that everyone spoke english, and especially if it is mandated by the contract, but this is not that big of a shocker.-Matt
——————————————————————
IG finds gaps in State oversight of embassy guard contracts
By Robert Brodsky
March 26, 2010
Private security guards responsible for protecting the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad reside in unsafe living conditions, work as many as 39 days consecutively and are unable to speak required English, according to a leaked report from the State Department’s inspector general.
The Project on Government Oversight, a Washington watchdog group, obtained the report, which underscored many of same contract oversight problems discovered last year with ArmorGroup North America guards at the U.S. Embassy in Kabul, Afghanistan.
While the Baghdad guard force run by Triple Canopy “has been effective in ensuring the safety of chief of mission personnel in Baghdad’s volatile security environment,” the new report found training and language deficiencies with the Herndon, Va.-based private security company.
The IG credited State’s Bureau of Diplomatic Security for its management of the embassy contract, but also highlighted serious lapses in the bureau’s oversight. The department plans to officially release the report next week.
“The contracting officer’s representative in Baghdad does not verify either the guards’ attendance at their posts or the accuracy of personnel rosters (muster sheets) before they are submitted, to ensure contractor charges for labor are accurate,” the report stated.
Triple Canopy has roughly 1,800 employees on the embassy contract — more than 90 percent are third-party nationals from Peru and Uganda. The audit, conducted by the IG’s Middle East Regional Office, found that due to their low levels of English proficiency, some guard supervisors are unable to adequately communicate with their subordinates, which could lead to serious problems during an emergency.
State disagreed with the finding, noting in its response that only a small percentage of guard personnel appeared not to meet the English proficiency level the contract requires. Triple Canopy did not respond to a request for comment on the report.
Arguably the most serious findings concern the housing conditions for contract guards at Camp Olympia. Triple Canopy personnel live in crowded barracks and shipping containers that exceed occupancy limits by more than 400 percent, according to the report. The barracks reportedly lack required sprinkler systems, fire extinguishers, smoke detectors, fire alarms, emergency lighting and dual exit points. The IG also discovered frayed electrical wires in high-traffic areas and combustible material near air conditioners.
“The embassy deputy facilities manager stated that Camp Olympia was unsafe and ‘if there was a fire in the dorms, some people will not get out,’ ” the report said.
Diplomatic Security officials said they were in the process of moving guards from the camp “as quickly as possible.” Nearly 400 guards have been relocated to other venues while the remaining personnel are expected to move in April.
Guards also appear to be working difficult schedules. Triple Canopy officials reported working 12-hour shifts an average of 10 to 11 consecutive days. The IG found some staffers worked as many as 39 days in a row when other guards were in training. The contract does not include guidelines on the number of consecutive days a guard can work.
Triple Canopy was awarded State’s Baghdad Embassy Security Force contract in July 2005. The contract’s original value was $356 million, but through September 2009 the firm had earned $438 million due to variations in labor hours, according to the IG.
For the most part, the firm has performed well guarding the largest embassy in the world, the IG said. No injuries or deaths have occurred on the company’s watch, records showed.
But the firm appears lax in its book-keeping and contract administration. The report said Triple Canopy’s training records are incomplete, making it impossible to determine if guard supervisors had taken mandatory preparatory courses.
The IG also discovered weaknesses in the canine explosive test procedures carried out by Triple Canopy’s subcontractor, RONCO Consulting Corp. The firm could not confirm that it was testing for all contractually mandated scents, the report said. In addition, the subcontractor reportedly used old materials to train dogs and stored materials in an unsafe manner.
A new contract will be awarded for the Baghdad Embassy by July 2010, but State said the guard force will be 38 percent smaller because of a drawdown in U.S. forces. Nonetheless, the IG noted that State’s embassy staff has inadequately planned for a reduced military presence in Baghdad, which could lead to $20 million in unnecessary security costs during the next two years.
State is no stranger to criticism of its embassy contracts. In September 2009, photographs surfaced of ArmorGroup workers engaged in raucous, alcohol-fueled parties near the Kabul Embassy. Guards were accused of hazing new employees, sexually harassing Afghan nationals, failing to supply an adequate number of guards, misusing private property and bringing a prostitute onto the base.
“How could State not have learned their lesson after the public flogging they got for their handling of the Kabul contract?” asked POGO Executive Director Danielle Brian. “This report again raises an important point about whether State can properly manage embassy security contracts in a war zone.”
Earlier this week, State announced it will hire a personal services contractor to help supervise ArmorGroup until it is removed from the contract in late 2010.
Story here.