In the reports,  DOD, State, and USAID are to provide the following for each 12-month  reporting period:  total number and value of contracts and assistance instruments  awarded,  total number and value of active contracts and assistance  instruments,  the extent to which such contracts and assistance instruments used  competitive procedures,  total number of contractor and assistance personnel at the end of  each quarter of the reporting period,  total number of contractor and assistance personnel performing  security functions at the end of each quarter of the reporting period,  and  total number of contractor and assistance personnel killed or  wounded. The joint reports are also to include the sources of information and data  used to compile the required information; a description of any known  limitations of the data reported, including known limitations of the  methodology and data sources used; and plans for strengthening  collection, coordination, and sharing of information on contracts and  assistance instruments in Iraq and Afghanistan through improvements to  common databases. The reporting requirements in the NDAA for FY2011 build upon prior  national defense authorization act requirements. Agencies Relied on Sources Other Than SPOT, but Data Used Had Significant Limitations

		Variety of Data Sources Used to Prepare Joint Report

DOD, State, and USAID’s joint report cited a number of limitations  associated with SPOT’s implementation, and as a result, the agencies  relied on a variety of other data sources to develop the report. The data presented in the agencies’ joint report had significant limitations,  many of which were not fully disclosed. As a result, the data should not  be used to draw conclusions about contracts, assistance instruments, and  associated personnel in Iraq or Afghanistan for fiscal year 2010 or to  identify trends over time. While the agencies collectively reported $22.7 billion in fiscal year 2010  obligations, the joint report understates the three agencies’ obligations on  contracts and assistance instruments with work performed in Iraq and  Afghanistan by at least $4 billion, nearly all for DOD contracts. As we reported last year, SPOT cannot be used to reliably  distinguish personnel performing security functions from other contractor  personnel, as each of the three available methods has limitations. For example,     while contractors and assistance recipients in Iraq report their  personnel numbers on a regular basis, a USAID official informed us  that only about 70 percent of their contractors and assistance  recipients in Afghanistan provide personnel information;    a USAID official told us they have a limited ability to verify the  accuracy or completeness of the data that are reported, especially for  Afghanistan where they operate far more projects than in Iraq;   the USAID official responsible for preparing the joint report raised  concerns about possible inconsistent reporting of security personnel  that could result in double counting; and  the data provided to us by USAID for our 2010 report did not include  personnel working under several contracts and assistance  instruments, such as four cooperative agreements for food security  programs in Afghanistan. For example, DOD officials from the  SPOT program management office told us that SPOT has been used in  conjunction with information from other systems to identify contractors  that should be billed for the use of government services, including  medical treatment and dining facilities. DOD and State officials also identified instances of using SPOT data to  inform operational planning for contractor support. Data and Reporting Limitations Affect Opportunities for Using SPOT to Manage, Oversee, and Coordinate

DOD, State, and USAID officials informed us that shortcomings in SPOT  data and reporting capabilities limit their ability to use the system in  managing, overseeing, and coordinating contracts with work performed in  Iraq and Afghanistan. In some cases, officials have relied on other data  sources for such purposes. The agencies’ ability to use SPOT for interagency coordination purposes  has been limited by the fact that they cannot easily access each other’s  data. DOD and State officials informed us that they  have increased efforts to validate SPOT data. Additional measures have been undertaken to help address the challenge  of tracking local nationals in SPOT. Practical and Technical Challenges Continue to Affect SPOT’s Ability to Track Statutorily Required Data

In 2009, we recommended that the three agencies develop a joint plan  with associated time frames to address SPOT’s limitations, but agencies  responded that a plan was not needed as their ongoing coordination  efforts were sufficient. SPOT program management officials and the agencies have identified  plans for further modifications and new guidance needed to address  some but not all of these limitations. SPOT is not being used to track the number of personnel killed and  wounded. Concluding Observations

In 2008, DOD, State, and USAID designated SPOT as their system of  record for tracking statutorily required information on contracts and  contractor personnel in Iraq and Afghanistan, a designation they  reaffirmed in 2010 when the requirement was expanded to include  assistance instruments and personnel. Yet the agencies still do not have  reliable sources and methods to report on contracts, assistance  instruments, and associated personnel in Iraq and Afghanistan. The agencies disagreed  with the need for the plan, citing ongoing coordination efforts as sufficient. Based on our review of the agencies’ joint report, we continue to  have this concern and are uncertain when SPOT will be fully implemented  and serve as a reliable source of data for management, oversight, and  coordination.
Why GAO Did This Study

DOD, State, and USAID have relied extensively on contracts and assistance instruments (grants and cooperative agreements) for a range of services in Iraq and Afghanistan. In the last 3 years, GAO has provided information on the agencies' contracts, assistance instruments, and associated personnel in the two countries, detailing the agencies' challenges tracking such information. Amendments from the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 now require the agencies to provide this and other information to Congress through annual joint reports. They also direct GAO to review those reports. In response, GAO reviewed the first joint report and assessed (1) data and data sources used to prepare the report; (2) use of data from the Synchronized Predeployment and Operational Tracker (SPOT) for management, oversight, and coordination; and (3) efforts to improve SPOT's tracking of statutorily required information. GAO compared data in the joint report to agency data GAO previously obtained, reviewed supporting documentation, and interviewed agency officials, including those in Iraq and Afghanistan, on how the data were collected and used.

What GAO Found

The Departments of Defense (DOD) and State and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) designated SPOT as their system in 2010 for tracking statutorily required information on contracts, assistance instruments, and associated personnel in Iraq and Afghanistan. Citing limitations with SPOT's implementation, the agencies generally relied on data sources other than SPOT to prepare their 2011 joint report. Only State used SPOT but just for its contractor personnel numbers. However, GAO found that regardless of the data source used, the agencies' data had significant limitations, many of which were not fully disclosed. For example, while the agencies collectively reported $22.7 billion in fiscal year 2010 obligations, we found that they underreported the value of Iraq and Afghanistan contracts and assistance instruments by at least $4 billion, the majority of which was for DOD contracts. In addition, data presented in the joint report on personnel, including those performing security functions, are of limited reliability because of significant over- and undercounting. For example, DOD did not disclose that its contractor personnel numbers for Afghanistan were overreported for most of the reporting period because of double counting. Additionally, despite the reporting requirement, State did not provide information on its assistance instruments or the number of personnel working under them. As a result of such limitations, data presented in the joint report should not be used to draw conclusions or identify trends over time. DOD, State, and USAID have used SPOT to a limited extent, primarily to manage and oversee individual contracts and personnel. Agency officials cited instances of using SPOT to help identify contractors that should be billed for the use of government services, including medical treatment and dining facilities. State and DOD officials also identified instances of using SPOT to help inform operational planning, such as preparing for the drawdown of U.S. forces in Iraq. Officials from the three agencies indicated that shortcomings in data and reporting capabilities have limited their use of SPOT and, in some cases, led them to rely on other data systems to help manage and oversee contracts and assistance instruments. Further, the agencies cannot readily access each other's data in SPOT, which limits interagency coordination opportunities. Recent efforts have been made to improve SPOT's tracking of contractor and assistance personnel. SPOT now allows users to enter aggregate, rather than individual personal information into SPOT, which may overcome resistance to using the system based on security concerns. In addition, DOD and State report increased efforts to validate personnel data in SPOT. However, practical and technical challenges continue to affect SPOT's ability to track other statutorily required data. For example, SPOT cannot be used to reliably distinguish personnel performing security functions from other contractors. Also, while SPOT has the capability to record when personnel have been killed or wounded, such information has not been regularly updated. The agencies have identified the need for further modifications and new guidance to address some but not all of these limitations. It is unclear when SPOT will serve as a reliable source of data to meet statutory requirements and be used by the agencies for management, oversight, and coordination. As a result, the agencies still do not have reliable sources and methods to report on contracts, assistance instruments, and associated personnel in Iraq and Afghanistan. In 2009, GAO recommended that DOD, State, and USAID develop a plan for addressing SPOT's limitations. The agencies disagreed, citing ongoing coordination as sufficient. GAO continues to believe such a plan is needed and is not making new recommendations.