When good ideas go bad: Why background investigations are important enough to send the very best.
As our nation’s capital, Washington, DC is the seat of the federal government and hosts all Federal government branches. These branches produce legislation that is intended to result in a more efficient and productive government for the American people. Unfortunately, even well considered legislation periodically results in “unintended consequences”. As defined by Ozzie Zehner, “Unintended consequences are unplanned outcomes that occur due to the implementation of a technology, policy, or other initiative.”
In 1993, as part of the Clinton administration, Vice President Albert Gore chaired the “Re-inventing Government” initiative. According to the media reporting, among its lofty goals, the initiative sought to develop cost-cutting measures to reduce the government budget and outsource select government functions to private industry. While most Americans are supportive of the idea of a more efficient government, the results of the “Re-Inventing Government” initiative have affected world politics and our citizen’s trust in their government to a level that is still developing today.
Most notably, the initiative proposed outsourcing certain, historically governmental, functions to for-profit private companies, effectively creating the profit driven, multi-billion dollar contracting industry. Prior to that time, the Federal Investigations Division of the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) was the government agency responsible for the investigation and vetting of candidates seeking access to secured government facilities and classified information. To cut costs, he initiative proposed privatizing this OPM function and the work of the 700 government employees in the Investigations Division. In response, a new company, U.S. Investigations Services (USIS), owned by the private equity firm “The Carlyle Group”, was formed to conduct background security investigations of individuals seeking clearances and access to government classified information and facilities.
Though current contracting regulations have severely limited the practice of “sole source” contracts, USIS was initially granted a non-competitive 3-year contract which supposedly ensured that USIS investigations would be conducted in strict compliance with existing government regulations and limited competition, while allowing for closer regulator scrutiny of USIS’s investigative product. In the ensuing years, as additional government functions were contracted to private companies, Keypoint Government Services (KGS) and CACI International incorporated (CACI) established themselves as USIS’ main competitors in conducting background investigations. Reporting no indicates that as additional government missions were privatized to a contracted workforce, the proliferation of companies conducting security investigations became a less strictly regulated, self-sustaining industry. To fully understand the scope of background security investigations industry, consider that in 2011, USIS was awarded a single new contract that was reported to be worth $2.45 billion USD and that this represents just one of over 100 government contracts held by the company.
Current incidents, most notably the Edward Snowden saga, indicate that the proliferation of companies conducting security investigations has overwhelmed the ability of OPM regulators to properly scrutinize the investigations, leading to incomplete investigations and individuals receiving security clearances who would not have passed a rigorous investigation. Snowden, a contractor employed by Booze-Allen Hamilton who possessed a top-secret clearance to work for the National Security Agency (NSA), highlight the need for strict adherence to the security clearance process. As has been widely reported, Snowden used his access to steal 100s of classified documents regarding NSA’s collection of telephonic communications and subsequently released that information through the media and to numerous foreign governments.
As the contractor that conducted Snowden’s security investigation and cleared him for a Top Secret clearance, USIS is under criminal investigation by OPM’s Office of the Inspector General (OIG) for inaccurate or incomplete security investigation processes. According to Don Kettl, dean of the School of Public Policy at the University of Maryland, the Snowden case “clearly raises the question about whether or not the government gets the benefits that were promised under the contracting out initiative”.
For additional consideration, like all investments, control of USIS has been sold to the for-profit equity firm, Providence Equity Partners LLC. Private businesses exist to make money and one method of increasing profits is to decrease the cost of conducting business while maintaining the amount of business conducted. According to Scott Amey, general counsel at the Project on Government Oversight, “we might need to reconsider the policy. As we learn more about these contracted-out services, we are finding that the government lacked proper oversight, and that contractors cut corners or perform poorly.”
It may be time that the Clinton Administration’s initiative to “Re-Invent Government” and outsourcing of certain government functions is reviewed. The “unintended consequence” of the initiative may now be that unknown numbers of individuals currently possess security clearances, have access to vital national security information and may be a risk to maintaining those secrets. As this issue is fully investigated, the final lesson for the government may be that, while outsourcing some government process and programs is possible, maintaining and securing vital national security information is probably better closely controlled by government personnel not operating to maximize profit for shareholders.
