GAO Oversight of Intelligence Community Contractors
“We do not have the full picture of who is working for the Intelligence Community as contractors, or why,” said Senator Thomas Carper at a June 2014 hearing, the record of which was just published last week.
See The Intelligence Community: Keeping Watch Over Its Contractor Workforce, Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, June 18, 2014, published March 18, 2016.
The hearing record is of particular interest as a reflection of the revived intelligence oversight role assumed by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) following the issuance of 2014 Intelligence Community Directive 114, which authorized GAO access to intelligence information under certain circumstances.
“That new Intelligence Community Directive, I think that did establish a good framework for us to move forward,” said GAO’s Timothy J. DiNapoli at the hearing. “It gave us an approach for a presumption of cooperation. It prevented the categorical denial of information, and access to much of the information on a more formal basis.”
And the Intelligence Community apparently responded to the GAO engagement constructively.
“We thought the responses to the draft report and the recommendations were solid,” Mr. DiNapoli said. “I actually thought that the Director [of National Intelligence] provided cogent responses saying here are some specific steps we are going to take with regard to improving information on the methodology; we are going to ask for that information so we will have a better handle on it.”
For her part, ODNI Principal Deputy Director Stephanie O’Sullivan also testified in support of the GAO role in intelligence oversight.
“The only way to really approach this–and this is what I tell my management organization–is by looking at this as an opportunity to see that which you are missing. It is that old adage of when you are in college and you typed a term paper, you could read that paper 50 times and read right over the typo every time. You just simply cannot see that which is the norm to you.”
“You need outside eyes to help you find problems,” Ms. O’Sullivan said, “and that is about the basic credo of IGs and GAO, to make the function of government more efficient and effective.”
A series of Questions for the Record appended to the newly published hearing volume addressed the issue of “Why have the number of contractors and the cost of contracts been classified?”
Advancing the U.S. leadership in emerging biotechnology is a strategic imperative, one that will shape regional development within the U.S., economic competitiveness abroad, and our national security for decades to come.
Inconsistent metrics and opaque reporting make future AI power‑demand estimates extremely uncertain, leaving grid planners in the dark and climate targets on the line
Federal and state governments need to ensure that the development of new AI and data center infrastructure does not increase costs for consumers, impact the environment, and exacerbate existing inequalities.
As AI becomes more capable and integrated throughout the United States economy, its growing demand for energy, water, land, and raw materials is driving significant economic and environmental costs, from increased air pollution to higher costs for ratepayers.