A new report from the Office of the Procurement Ombudsman (OPO) found that a majority of subcontractors part of ArriveCan contracts did no work.
Contractors submitting bids to work on the application were required to detail what “resources” they would use. This includes details, such as the relevant work history of subcontractors working on the project.
“In 76 percent of the applicable contracts, some or all of the resources proposed by the successful supplier did not perform any work on the contract,” Alexander wrote in his report.
Jeglic further notes there could have been a legitimate reason to explain this figure. “There was, however, nothing in the files to explain why resources proposed in the winning bids were not included on TAs (task authorizations) issued for the same resource categories.”
A TA contains details on what activities a company will need to perform, a description of the final results, and a schedule for the project’s completion.
The ArriveCan project ended up costing $54 million, and one small company received most of it. GC Strategies, a company consisting of two people, according to multiple media reports, received a $25.3 million contract for IT services. GC Strategies was the only company to submit a bid.
“There were numerous examples where the supplier had simply copied and pasted requirements from mandatory and point-rated criteria as project experience of the resource, “Jeglic wrote.
One such example was the requirement to prove the contractor had experience implementing mobile applications on two of three popular mobile operating systems: iOS, Android, and Blackberry. GC Strategies “simply stated the proposed resource’s past project responsibilities included ‘designing, developing and implementing mobile-based applications for two of the platforms below: iOS, Android, Blackberry,’” a word-for-word explanation included in the government’s criteria.
The report further points out that 41 percent of the contracts associated with the ArriveCan app weren’t disclosed online. Of the 41 total contracts, 17 weren’t available on the Open Government website as required. Jeglic notes the move contradicts the government’s commitments to transparency and accountability.
ArriveCan also had 13 “non-competitive sole-source contracts,” meaning companies didn’t have to participate in the usual bidding process because of the “pressing emergency” of the pandemic. GC Strategies received one of these contracts, worth $11.1 million, despite the lack of written record regarding the communication for the contract.
The OPO made 13 recommendations to address the issues.
Image credit: Shutterstock
