DeLauro Requests Investigation into US-VISIT Program

DeLauro Requests Investigation into US-VISIT Program

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Congresswoman Rosa L. DeLauro (Conn.-3) today called on the Office of the Inspector General of the Department of Homeland Security to launch an investigation into the U.S. Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology Program (US VISIT), a program that the Department awarded to Accenture LLC, whose parent corporation is incorporated abroad. Press reports over the last several months have documented emerging problems with the program, which is expected to cost taxpayers as much as $10 billion. DeLauro has previously questioned inverted corporations - companies that incorporate overseas to pay fewer U.S. taxes - bidding on federal contracts.

"Over the last few months, a number of press reports have pointed to emerging problems with US VISIT, making clear the major challenges ahead for the program's implementation," wrote DeLauro. "In particular, I am concerned that despite spending nearly $1 billion in federal appropriations on US VISIT, the program tracks only a small fraction of foreign visitors - fewer than 1 percent by some reports. As you know, the agency's initial projection for full screening of applicants was nearly 3 percent."

The US-VISIT program was designed to be a comprehensive immigration tracking system, recording the border crossings of all foreigners in the United States and alerting authorities when individual visas expire. Experts have since observed numerous problems in the program's implementation.

The full text of the letter follows.

October 19, 2005

The Honorable Richard L. Skinner

Inspector General (Acting)

U.S. Department of Homeland Security

Washington, D.C. 20528

Dear Mr. Skinner:

I write because of my long-standing interest in inverted corporations bidding on Federal contracts. I believe that this corporate structure gives these entities a potentially significant, and unfair, advantage over our domestic companies while in pursuit of federal contracts through the Department of Homeland Security. In fact, a June 2004 Government Accountability Office report, International Taxation: Tax Haven Companies Were More Likely to Have a Tax Cost Advantage in Federal Contracting (GAO-04-856), outlined how these corporations can avoid paying U.S. taxes, thus allowing them to artificially lower their bids on contract proposals.

I am deeply concerned that these "corporate expatriates" will ultimately weaken our national industrial base because of the unfair pricing advantage they have over their domestic competitors. For that reason, I am writing to enlist your assistance in answering critical questions about one of the Department's most critical tasks, implementation of the U.S. Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology Program (US VISIT), a program that the Department awarded to Accenture LLC, whose parent corporation is incorporated abroad.

Over the last few months, a number of press reports have pointed to emerging problems with US VISIT, making clear the major challenges ahead for the program's implementation ("Hurdles for High-Tech Efforts to Track Who Crosses Borders," New York Times, August 10, 2005; and "U.S. Border Security at a Crossroads: Technology Problems Limit Effectiveness of US-VISIT Program to Screen Foreigners," Washington Post, May 23, 2005). In particular, I am concerned that despite spending nearly $1 billion in federal appropriations on US VISIT, the program tracks only a small fraction of foreign visitors -- fewer than 1 percent by some reports. As you know, the agency's initial projection for full screening of applicants was nearly 3 percent.

The key questions I would like answered include:

I. Total cost.

(a) Please provide a list of all expenditures made on US VISIT to date, broken out by both object class and recipient entity/organization (i.e. allocations to private companies and those apportioned for civil service costs), including obligation rates versus appropriated levels provided by the Congress.

(b) Press reports indicate that the project's cost has grown from its original $7.2 billion estimate to as much as $10 billion. Please provide us with the system's projected total cost, how that figure varies from the program's original estimates and Accenture's winning bid, and a detailed explanation impacted by any change in cost for each item with a life cycle cost greater than $10,000,000, including program management.

II. Cost performance.

(a) Please provide all cost performance reports in an unredacted form done by the Department, any member of the US VISIT contractor team, or any outside consultant or evaluator, including all relevant data required by the Office of Management and Budget under OMB Circular A-11 (Form 300).

(b) Please indicate how these reports demonstrate the earned value provided by US VISIT.

(c) If no cost performance reports have been done to date, when will such reports be provided and will independent third party observers prepare them with no financial or political self-interest in their findings?

III. Port of entry deployment.

Since land ports of entry account for approximately four out of every five entrants into the US annually, these are among the most important locations that should be protected by US VISIT. The Department stated in August 2004 that it would have the US VISIT system installed at the 50 busiest land ports of entry by the end of last year. It subsequently announced in November that it would begin a staggered implementation of the system in that month.

(a) Please identify the statutory and regulatory requirements for installing the system at all US land ports of entry, including both the number and schedule for all locations, by region and rated by degree of importance.

(b) Please provide the current number of ports where US VISIT is installed, with capability for tracking both entry and exit using biometric data.

(c) Please provide the schedule and cost to complete these deployments (comparing the original estimates for both categories to the current estimates), and a detailed explanation for what accounts for any differences between the original and current data.

IV. Cost Allocations.

(a) Please provide, in total for the life of the program and by fiscal year, the level of funds spent on headquarters' information technology versus solutions at ports of entry.

(b) Please provide, in total for the life of the program and by fiscal year, the level of funding and FTEs supported (contractor and civil servants) on program management and related infrastructure.

V. Defining the program's effectiveness.

(a) Please quantify the effectiveness and efficiency of the technology solution proposed through US VISIT to meet the system's three objectives as defined by General Accountability Office in 2003: (i) collect and match alien arrival and departure data electronically; (ii) be accessible to the border management community; and (3) support machine readable, tamper-resistant documents with biometric identifiers at ports of entry. For each area, please indicate how the articulated results were derived. This data should address the weakness found by the GAO in its report on the FY 2005 expenditure plan that funding for the program is not associated with specific capabilities and benefits, nor does it include any information on related metrics or on progress against achieving any of the projected benefits. Additionally, it should address how the program and its contractor are faring against commitments made in prior years.

(b) Please identify the number of users of the system, and quantify how this utilization rate compares to the projected use of the system at this point in time in Accenture's proposal to the Government. If the utilization rate is less than originally anticipated in the timeline by the Government's selected bidder in its winning proposal, please provide a detailed explanation for any discrepancy, and the plan of action to accelerate deployment to increase its use, including the cost, schedule and general technical approach to overcome these program delays.

(c) Please identify the level of award fee provided to Accenture since it was awarded the contract in 2004, and the justification for the rate of award provided.

I understand that DHS intends to expand this unproven program to all U.S. land entry points by the end of the year, making this information very time sensitive. I greatly appreciate your cooperation in this matter and would also appreciate your office providing mine with a timeline for completion of the answers requested in this letter.

If you have any questions related to this request, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Sincerely,

ROSA L. DELAURO

Member of Congress

http://www.house.gov/delauro/press/2005/October/USVISIT_request_10_19_05.html