Summary: Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO reviewed the Department of Defense's (DOD) use of consulting services in acquiring three weapon systems, focusing on: (1) how DOD contractors used consultants; and (2) whether consultants worked for both the government and defense contractors on weapon systems and, if so, whether any conflicts of interest existed.
GAO found that: (1) from 1984 through 1989, the Army obligated at least $9 million in consulting services for the Fiber Optic Guided Missile; (2) from 1983 through 1989, the Navy obligated $18 million in consulting services for the V-22 aircraft; (3) during fiscal years 1987 and 1988, the Air Force contracted for consulting services to support the Peacekeeper Rail Garrison project; (4) the Air Force did not separately identify the amount it obligated for consulting services; (5) 3 of the 6 defense contractors GAO reviewed retained 18 consultants to advise them on dealing with DOD; (6) 4 of the 6 contractors used 40 additional contractors to obtain more technical services; (7) there were no conflicts of interest in the three instances it identified where consultants worked for both the government and a defense contractor on matters related to the same weapon systems, but one contractor did not comply with its contract's conflict-of-interest provisions; (8) the Army and Air Force did not classify consulting services for one Fiber Optic Guided Missile contract and seven Rail Garrison project contracts and did not designate commands to manage those systems; and (9) the services had differing interpretations of what constituted advisory and assistance services and inaccurately identified consulting services in their budget submissions to Congress.
