After years of debate, taxpayers are close to finally getting a federal contractor misconduct database that should stop their money from being wasted by companies that break the law and don’t deliver. Problem is they may never actually be allowed to see it.

Today marks the close of the public commentary period on federal acquisition regulations that will create the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS). The push for a government-wide clearinghouse on contractor performance gained traction in recent years as revelations about soldiers being endangered by shoddy construction in Iraq and twentysomething arms dealers selling corroded Chinese ammunition to the U.S. government demonstrated the need for more oversight.

FAPIIS had a promising start in the Contractor and Federal Spending Accountability Act of 2008, sponsored by Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) and Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO). The database described in the Act was modeled on the Project on Government Oversight’s Federal Contractor Misconduct Database . Though some individual agencies maintain similar databases, the only extant government-wide database simply lists suspended and debarred companies. 

Unfortunately, a few points got lost in translation between the government oversight and armed services committees, which folded the legislation into the FY 2009 National Defense Authorization Act. The database was strongly opposed by contractor groups such as the Information Technology Association of America as well as lawmakers like former Rep. Tom Davis (R-VA), whose Northern Virginia district is chockablock with Beltway contractors. The version that ended up in the authorization bill would only track civil and criminal proceedings resulting in a penalty or conviction, excluding complaints that could show a pattern of problems or those that end in settlements.

Worse, the current version would be accessible only to federal contracting officers and members of Congress. Beyond the fact that taxpayers should know where—and to whom—their dollars go, cutting the public out of its watchdog role is particularly troubling in light of a 2008 Defense Department Inspector General report that found acquisition officers filed performance reports on contractors late or incorrectly, and rarely checked the information when awarding a contract anyway. Clearly, this gloomy corner of government needs all the sunlight it can get.

For more information, contact Laura Peterson