Inspector General cites FirstNet contracting issues during first year

In addition, an unidentified FirstNet board member—identified in the report only as “FirstNet board member A” and as someone “who was also given certain operational responsibilities"—“inappropriately directed WRI hiring actions” of subject matter experts (SMEs) associated with awarding a contract to WRI in November 2012.

“Specifically, FirstNet directed WRI via NIST’s contracting office to include a total of 16 SMEs in its proposal. On Nov. 6, 2012—9 days prior to contract award—NIST e-mailed WRI, a spreadsheet containing the names of 14 SMEs,” the IG report states. “In addition, NIST also confirmed that 12 of the 16 SMEs included in the proposal were recommended directly by a FirstNet Board member, while the other 4 SMEs were transitioned in from the previous engagement with [another FirstNet contractor].

“The actions taken by the government give the appearance that, in order to be awarded the contract, WRI was required to hire the SMEs recommended by the government.”

Because these SMEs remained as independent contractors instead of becoming WRI employees, WRI actually was no longer eligible to be awarded the contract as a small-business entity, according to the IG report.

Another problem with the FirstNet contract with WRI was the fact that “FirstNet board member A” directly assigned tasks to a subject-matter expert prior to the person being hired by WRI, the IG report states.

“The SME proceeded with the work based upon the verbal authorization of FirstNet board member A,” the IG report states. “Because WRI had not hired the SME and had no knowledge of board member A’s action, it did not have supervision or control of the SME. WRI did not become aware of the hiring action until the SME presented the contractor with an invoice, for the period March 18–April 17, 2013, that included 142 hours totaling $16,756 charged in unauthorized time and $692 in unauthorized travel costs ($17,448 total that the government paid).

“Based on the board member’s direction on April 13, 2013, the [contracting office representative] authorized a start date for the SME effective April 15, 2013. Commitments not authorized by law can have serious repercussions for the government—and can be the basis of legal disputes between the government and the contractor, which may result in personal liability for the individual who made the commitment.”