Contractor Integrity
Stronger Safeguards Needed for Contractor Access to Sensitive Information Gao ID: GAO-10-693 September 10, 2010In performing agency tasks, contractor employees often require access to sensitive information that must be protected from unauthorized disclosure or misuse. This report assesses the (1) extent to which agency guidance and contracts contain safeguards for contractor access to sensitive information, and (2) adequacy of governmentwide guidance on how agencies are to safeguard sensitive information to which contractors may have access. To conduct this work, GAO identified key attributes involving sensitive-information safeguards, analyzed guidance and met with officials at three agencies selected for their extensive reliance on contractor employees, analyzed 42 of their contract actions for services potentially requiring contractor access to sensitive information, and analyzed the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and pending FAR changes regarding governmentwide guidance on contractor safeguards for access to sensitive information.
GAO's analysis of guidance and contract actions at three agencies found areas where sensitive information is not fully safeguarded and thus may remain at risk of unauthorized disclosure or misuse. The Departments of Defense (DOD), Homeland Security (DHS), and Health and Human Services (HHS) have all supplemented the FAR and developed some guidance and standard contract provisions, but the safeguards available in DOD's and HHS's guidance do not always protect all relevant types of sensitive information contractors may access during contract performance. Also, DOD's, DHS's, and HHS's supplemental FAR guidance do not specify contractor responsibilities for prompt notification to the agency if unauthorized disclosure or misuse occurs. Almost half of the 42 contract actions analyzed lacked clauses or provisions that safeguarded against disclosure and inappropriate use of all potential types of sensitive information that contractors might access during contract performance. Additionally, DOD and HHS lack guidance on the use of nondisclosure agreements, while DHS has found that these help accountability by informing contractors of their responsibilities to safeguard confidentiality and appropriate use and the potential consequences they face from violations. There have been numerous recommendations for improved governmentwide guidance and contract provisions in the FAR, such as prohibiting certain types of contractor personnel from using sensitive information for personal gain. To address some of these areas, regulatory changes are pending to develop standardized approaches and contract clauses in the FAR that agencies could use to safeguard sensitive information, rather than developing such safeguards individually. However, similarly to issues identified in agency guidance, GAO found two key areas the FAR does not yet address. These include (1) agency use of nondisclosure agreements as a condition of contractor access to sensitive information, and (2) the need to establish clear requirements for contractors to promptly notify agencies of unauthorized disclosure and misuse of sensitive information. The ongoing rulemaking process provides an opportunity to address the need for additional FAR guidance in both areas. GAO recommends that the Office of Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP) ensure pending changes to the FAR address two additional safeguards for contractor access to sensitive information: the use of nondisclosure agreements and prompt notification of unauthorized disclosure or misuse of sensitive information. In oral comments, OFPP agreed with the recommendations. DHS also concurred with the recommendations, while DOD and HHS had no comment.
RecommendationsOur recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director: John K. Needham Team: Government Accountability Office: Acquisition and Sourcing Management Phone: (202) 512-5274GAO-10-693, Contractor Integrity: Stronger Safeguards Needed for Contractor Access to Sensitive Information
This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-10-693
entitled 'Contractor Integrity: Stronger Safeguards Needed for
Contractor Access to Sensitive Information' which was released on
September 10, 2010.
This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability
Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as
part of a longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility.
Every attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data
integrity of the original printed product. Accessibility features,
such as text descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes
placed at the end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters,
are provided but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format
of the printed version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an
exact electronic replica of the printed version. We welcome your
feedback. Please E-mail your comments regarding the contents or
accessibility features of this document to Webmaster@gao.gov.
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this
material separately.
Report to the Chairman, Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management,
Government Information, Federal Services, and International Security,
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, U.S. Senate:
United States Government Accountability Office:
GAO:
September 2010:
Contractor Integrity:
Stronger Safeguards Needed for Contractor Access to Sensitive
Information:
GAO-10-693:
GAO Highlights:
Highlights of GAO-10-693, a report to the Chairman, Subcommittee on
Federal Financial Management, Government Information, Federal
Services, and International Security, Committee on Homeland Security
and Governmental Affairs, U.S. Senate.
Why GAO Did This Study:
In performing agency tasks, contractor employees often require access
to sensitive information that must be protected from unauthorized
disclosure or misuse. This report assesses the (1) extent to which
agency guidance and contracts contain safeguards for contractor access
to sensitive information, and (2) adequacy of governmentwide guidance
on how agencies are to safeguard sensitive information to which
contractors may have access. To conduct this work, GAO identified key
attributes involving sensitive-information safeguards, analyzed
guidance and met with officials at three agencies selected for their
extensive reliance on contractor employees, analyzed 42 of their
contract actions for services potentially requiring contractor access
to sensitive information, and analyzed the Federal Acquisition
Regulation (FAR) and pending FAR changes regarding governmentwide
guidance on contractor safeguards for access to sensitive information.
What GAO Found:
GAO‘s analysis of guidance and contract actions at three agencies
found areas where sensitive information is not fully safeguarded and
thus may remain at risk of unauthorized disclosure or misuse. The
Departments of Defense (DOD), Homeland Security (DHS), and Health and
Human Services (HHS) have all supplemented the FAR and developed some
guidance and standard contract provisions, but the safeguards
available in DOD‘s and HHS‘s guidance do not always protect all
relevant types of sensitive information contractors may access during
contract performance (examples of some types of sensitive information
contractors may access are listed below). Also, DOD‘s, DHS‘s, and HHS‘
s supplemental FAR guidance do not specify contractor responsibilities
for prompt notification to the agency if unauthorized disclosure or
misuse occurs. Almost half of the 42 contract actions analyzed lacked
clauses or provisions that safeguarded against disclosure and
inappropriate use of all potential types of sensitive information that
contractors might access during contract performance. Additionally,
DOD and HHS lack guidance on the use of nondisclosure agreements,
while DHS has found that these help accountability by informing
contractors of their responsibilities to safeguard confidentiality and
appropriate use and the potential consequences they face from
violations.
There have been numerous recommendations for improved governmentwide
guidance and contract provisions in the FAR, such as prohibiting
certain types of contractor personnel from using sensitive information
for personal gain. To address some of these areas, regulatory changes
are pending to develop standardized approaches and contract clauses in
the FAR that agencies could use to safeguard sensitive information,
rather than developing such safeguards individually. However,
similarly to issues identified in agency guidance, GAO found two key
areas the FAR does not yet address. These include (1) agency use of
nondisclosure agreements as a condition of contractor access to
sensitive information, and (2) the need to establish clear
requirements for contractors to promptly notify agencies of
unauthorized disclosure and misuse of sensitive information. The
ongoing rulemaking process provides an opportunity to address the need
for additional FAR guidance in both areas.
Table: Examples of Sensitive Information:
Type of information: Personal;
Examples:
* Name;
* Social Security number;
* Date and place of birth;
* Patient health and medical information.
Type of information: Business proprietary;
Examples:
* Trade secrets;
* Manufacturing processes, operations, or techniques;
* Amount or source of any profits, losses, or expenditures.
Type of information: Agency sensitive;
Examples:
* Security management information;
* Predecisional planning and budgeting documents;
* Continuity-of-operations information.
Source: GAO analysis.
[End of table]
What GAO Recommends:
GAO recommends that the Office of Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP)
ensure pending changes to the FAR address two additional safeguards
for contractor access to sensitive information: the use of
nondisclosure agreements and prompt notification of unauthorized
disclosure or misuse of sensitive information. In oral comments, OFPP
agreed with the recommendations. DHS also concurred with the
recommendations, while DOD and HHS had no comment.
View [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-10-693] or key
components. For more information, contact John Needham at (202) 512-
4841 or needhamjk1@gao.gov.
[End of section]
Contents:
Letter:
Background:
Safeguards to Protect Sensitive Information Not Always Available in
Agency Guidance or Included in Contract Actions:
Efforts Underway to Improve Governmentwide Guidance in the FAR for
Contractor Access to Sensitive Information:
Conclusions:
Recommendations for Executive Action:
Agency Comments and Our Evaluation:
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology:
Appendix II: Sensitive But Unclassified Markings Identified by
President's Task Force on Controlled Unclassified Information:
Appendix III: Agency Contract Provisions Containing Contractor
Safeguards for Sensitive Information:
Appendix IV: Contractor Employee Nondisclosure Agreements Used by
Agencies:
Appendix V: Recent FAR Changes to Add Guidance and Contract Provisions
for Information Technology (IT) Security:
Appendix VI: Comments from the Department of Homeland Security:
Appendix VII: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments:
Tables:
Table 1: Examples of Sensitive Information:
Table 2: Analysis of Control Practices in Agency FAR Supplements for
Safeguarding Sensitive Information Accessed by Contractors:
Table 3: Analysis of Contract Provisions Establishing Contractor
Safeguards for Sensitive Information:
Table 4: Analysis of Contract Requirements for Nondisclosure
Agreements:
Table 5: FAR Contract Provisions for Safeguarding Certain Types of
Sensitive Information:
Table 6: Status of Pending FAR Cases to Revise Policies and Clauses
for Contractor Use and Confidentiality of Sensitive Information:
Table 7: Selected SBU Markings Currently in Use:
Figures:
Figure 1: HSAR Clause 3052.204-71, Contractor Employee Access:
Figure 2: DFARS Clause 252.204-7000, Disclosure of Information:
Figure 3: HHSAR 352.224-70, Confidentiality of Information:
Figure 4: Source Selection Non-disclosure Agreement Used by the Air
Force:
Figure 5: Confidentiality Agreement Used by DOD's TRICARE Management
Activity for Contractor Employees Providing Administrative Support
into the Source-Selection Process:
Figure 6: Non-disclosure Agreement for Contractor Employees and
Subcontractors Used by DOD's TRICARE Management Activity:
Figure 7: DHS Form 11000-6, Sensitive But Unclassified Information Non-
disclosure Agreement DHS Requires from Contractors and Consultants:
Figure 8: Non-disclosure Agreement Used by the Department of the
Treasury for TARP Contractor Employees and Management Officials:
Abbreviations:
AFFARS: Air Force Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement:
BPA: blanket purchase agreement:
CMS: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services:
CUI: controlled unclassified information:
DFARS: Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement:
DHS: Department of Homeland Security:
DOD: Department of Defense:
FAR: Federal Acquisition Regulation:
FISMA: Federal Information Security Management Act of 2002:
FOIA: Freedom of Information Act:
FOUO: for official use only:
FPDS-NG: Federal Procurement Data System-Next Generation:
HHS: Department of Health and Human Services:
HHSAR: Department of Health and Human Services Acquisition Regulation:
HIPAA: Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996:
HSAR: Department of Homeland Security Acquisition Regulation:
HSPD-12: Homeland Security Presidential Directive 12:
IT: information technology:
OFPP: Office of Federal Procurement Policy:
OMB: Office of Management and Budget:
Privacy Act: The Privacy Act of 1974:
SBU: sensitive but unclassified:
TARP: Troubled Asset Relief Program:
TMA: TRICARE Management Activity:
Treasury: Department of the Treasury:
[End of section]
United States Government Accountability Office:
Washington, DC 20548:
September 10, 2010:
The Honorable Thomas R. Carper:
Chairman:
Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management, Government Information,
Federal Services, and International Security:
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs:
United States Senate:
Dear Mr. Chairman:
To a great extent, federal agencies rely on support contractor
employees to help accomplish a broad array of complex and mission-
critical functions.[Footnote 1] In carrying out their day-to-day tasks
for federal agencies in what the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
calls the multisector workforce,[Footnote 2] contractor employees
often require extensive access to and use of sensitive government
information. Protection of sensitive information is critical because
unauthorized disclosure can erode the integrity of government
operations and lead to situations in which that information is misused
for private gain, potentially harming important interests such as the
privacy of individuals, commercial business proprietary rights,
national security, and law enforcement. The risks associated with
contractor misuse of sensitive information have been the subject of
media attention, such as a recent case involving a contractor
employee's theft of names, Social Security numbers, and dates of birth
for Transportation Security Administration airport employees in Boston
and a case involving State Department contractor employees'
unauthorized viewing of the electronic passport files of three 2008
presidential candidates.
With the growth in use of contractors supporting government
operations, the question of how best to limit contractor misuse and
unauthorized disclosure of sensitive information becomes increasingly
important. Many of the rules governing how contractors operate are
articulated in the Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) system, which
establishes uniform policies and procedures for acquisition of
supplies and services by all executive agencies. It consists of the
FAR and agency-specific regulations that supplement and implement the
FAR with additional guidance to meet specific needs of the agencies.
[Footnote 3] In its 2007 report, the Acquisition Advisory Panel
reported a concern that not all federal agencies had established
guidance for how support-services contractor employees should protect
sensitive information such as confidential or proprietary data from
release or improper use.[Footnote 4] The panel concluded that
substantial benefits could be achieved if governmentwide guidance and
contract clauses were developed in the FAR that federal agencies could
use to protect sensitive information, rather than having agencies
develop such clauses individually. Our work has reported similar
concerns and is generally consistent with the panel's recommendations
about the proper role of contractor employees in the multisector
workforce.[Footnote 5]
Given the government's reliance on contractors and their access to
sensitive information, you asked us to review safeguards in the
federal acquisition system to manage risks and control contractor
access to sensitive information. Specifically, we assessed the (1)
extent to which agency guidance and contracts contain safeguards for
contractor access to sensitive information, and (2) adequacy of
governmentwide guidance in the FAR on how agencies are to
contractually safeguard sensitive information to which contractor
employees may have access.
To assess agency guidance and contracts relating to contractor access
to sensitive information, we analyzed the type of information agencies
identify as requiring protection; limiting its disclosure; and
prohibiting its misuse based on (1) review of agency practices related
to controls over contractor access to sensitive information, (2)
review of applicable standards drawn from GAO's Standards for Internal
Controls in the Federal Government,[Footnote 6] and (3) discussions
with government security and contracting officials responsible for
administrative, information, and contractor personnel security
functions. To assess the extent to which agency guidance required the
use of contract clauses and provisions to safeguard sensitive
information, we selected three agencies that rank among the top
procurers of contracted services in fiscal year 2008 and that our
prior work shows rely extensively on contractors--the (1) Department
of Defense (DOD), (2) Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and (3)
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). At all three agencies,
we analyzed agency FAR supplements as well as policy and guidance
regarding sensitive information safeguards. We also interviewed
acquisition policy, security, and privacy officials to discuss their
supplements to the FAR and the contract provisions they use to meet
their specific agency needs. To assess the extent to which agency
contracts contain such safeguards, we analyzed contract actions
[Footnote 7] for services potentially requiring contractor access to
sensitive information at DOD, DHS, and HHS. More specifically, at each
of five organizational locations at DOD, DHS, and HHS, we analyzed
documentation for a nongeneralizable sample of 6 to 10 (for a total of
42) contract actions for support services, selected because they
involve contractors working in close proximity to government employees
and to provide a cross section of services contracts to review by type
and functions performed. The purpose of this contract analysis was to
determine whether they contained contract provisions consistent with
attributes we identified for safeguarding sensitive information from
unauthorized contractor disclosure and misuse. We used content
analysis to classify and code the information in the contract
documents. Two GAO analysts independently reviewed the provisions and
clauses in each contract or task order and then reconciled any
differences in how they were coded. For nine of the contract actions
that we judgmentally selected for in-depth case studies, we also
interviewed officials, such as contracting officers, program managers,
contracting officers' representatives, and security and privacy
officials.
To assess the adequacy of governmentwide guidance, we analyzed FAR
requirements that prescribe protections associated with sensitive
information. We also reviewed proposed and pending amendments to the
FAR. To further understand steps being taken to amend the FAR, we
interviewed officials at the Office of Federal Procurement Policy
(OFPP) in OMB and other agencies with FAR Council membership.[Footnote
8] We conducted this performance audit from May 2009 through September
2010 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing
standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit
to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable
basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives.
We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for
our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. Additional
details of our objectives, scope, and methodology are included in
appendix I.
Background:
Unauthorized disclosure of sensitive information by government or
contractor employees through negligence or misconduct can have a
significant effect on the government's ability to perform its primary
functions, potentially resulting in financial loss, damaged
reputation, and loss of public trust. Sensitive information may not
always be explicitly designated or marked as such. For the purposes of
this report, we use the term "sensitive information" to generally
refer to information under an agency's authority or control that has a
degree of confidentiality[Footnote 9] such that its loss, misuse,
unauthorized access, or modification could compromise that
confidentiality and harm important interests, such as personal and
medical privacy to which individuals are entitled under laws,[Footnote
10] national security, law enforcement, proprietary commercial rights,
or the conduct of agency programs.
The large but unquantifiable amount of sensitive information generated
by the government makes understanding its scope more difficult and
agencies' safeguarding this information from unauthorized disclosure
or inappropriate use by contractors a complex challenge. Table 1 shows
examples of several types of sensitive information. Additional
examples are listed in appendix II. All examples were drawn from a
myriad of designations that agencies use to describe sensitive
information.
Table 1: Examples of Sensitive Information:
Type of information: Personal;
Description: The terms personal information and personally
identifiable information can be used interchangeably to refer to any
Privacy Act-protected information about an individual maintained by an
agency, including (1) any information that can be used to distinguish
or trace an individual's identity; (2) any other information that is
linked or linkable to an individual;
Examples:
* Name;
* Social Security number;
* Date and place of birth;
* Mother's maiden name;
* Biometric records;
* Patient health and medical information;
* Educational information;
* Financial information;
* Employment information;
* Census data;
* Taxpayer data.
Type of information: Source selection;
Description: Nonpublic information prepared for use by an agency to
evaluate a bid or proposal to enter into an agency procurement
contract, such as contractor's proposed costs or the government's
evaluation plans;
Examples:
* Contractor bid or proposal information, including cost or pricing
data;
* Source-selection plans;
* Technical evaluation plans;
* Technical evaluations of proposals;
* Cost or price evaluations of proposals;
* Rankings of bids, proposals, or competitors;
* Competitive range determinations;
* Evaluations of source-selection panels, boards, or advisory councils.
Type of information: Business proprietary;
Description: Nonpublic information that is used, produced, or marketed
under legal rights of the business concern;
Examples:
* Information that may relate to trade secrets, processes, operations,
style of work, or apparatus;
* Information that may relate to the identity, confidential
statistical data, amount or source of any income, profits, losses, or
expenditures;
* Information about manufacturing processes, operations, or techniques
marked proprietary by a business concern.
Type of information: Agency sensitive;
Description: Information relating to an agency's mission, management
operations, or staff that is generally not released to the public.
Each agency may individually determine what qualifies as this type of
information, therefore, the type of information covered by this
category varies by agency;
Examples:
* Continuity-of-operations information;
* Security management information;
* System and network monitoring information;
* Predecisional planning, programming, budgeting, and execution
documents and information;
* Protection services (building security);
* Personnel records.
Source: GAO analysis of laws, regulations, and other government
sources.
[End of table]
The federal government uses a variety of means, whether prescribed by
statute, executive order, or other authority, to limit dissemination
and protect against the inadvertent disclosure of certain types of
sensitive information. For information the government considers
critical to our national security, the government may take steps to
protect such information by classifying it as Top Secret, Secret, or
Confidential pursuant to criteria established by law and executive
order.[Footnote 11] Information that does not meet the thresholds
established for classification as national security information but
that an agency nonetheless considers sufficiently sensitive to warrant
restricted dissemination has generally been referred to as sensitive
but unclassified (SBU). In designating information this way, agencies
determine that the information they use must therefore be safeguarded
from public release. Some, but not all, SBU designations used by
agencies have a specific basis in statute.
For example, some agencies use the provisions of the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA)[Footnote 12] as their basis for designating
information as SBU. FOIA establishes that federal agencies must
generally provide the public with access to government information,
thus enabling them to learn about government operations and decisions.
FOIA establishes a legal right of access to government records and
information, on the basis of the principles of openness and
accountability in government. But the act also prescribes nine
specific categories of information that are exempt from disclosure:
for example, trade secrets and certain privileged commercial or
financial information, certain personnel and medical files, and
certain law enforcement records or information.[Footnote 13] Thus the
need to safeguard sensitive information from public disclosure while
striking the appropriate balance with the goal of government
transparency is another challenge agencies must continually address.
Protecting legitimate security, law enforcement, and privacy interests
also must be carefully balanced with protecting civil liberties. Of
critical importance are providing clear rules to those who handle
sensitive information and ensuring that the handling and dissemination
of information is not restricted unless there is compelling need.
Government ethics rules prohibit federal employees from using
sensitive nonpublic information, defined below, for personal gain or
to further the interests of another, whether by advice or
recommendation or through knowing unauthorized disclosure. For federal
employees, certain activities and acts that affect a personal
financial interest may also result in violations of criminal law with
potentially serious consequences, including dismissal, prosecution,
fines, and imprisonment.[Footnote 14] Because not all government
ethics rules and related statutes apply to contractors, many of these
prohibitions do not extend to contractor employees working in the
multisector workforce.
Nonpublic Information as Defined in Government Ethics Rules:
Nonpublic information is information that the employee gains by reason
of federal employment and that s/he knows or reasonably should know
has not been made available to the general public. It includes
information that s/he knows or reasonably should know:
1. Is routinely exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of
Information Act, codified at 5 U.S.C. § 552, or otherwise protected
from disclosure by statute, Executive order or regulation;
2. Is designated as confidential by an agency; or;
3. Has not actually been disseminated to the general public and is not
authorized to be made available to the public on request.
Source: GAO analysis of 5 C.F.R. 2635.703 (b).
Safeguards to Protect Sensitive Information Not Always Available in
Agency Guidance or Included in Contract Actions:
Our analysis of guidance and contract actions at three agencies found
areas where sensitive information is not fully safeguarded and thus
may remain at risk of unauthorized disclosure or misuse. DHS, DOD, and
HHS FAR supplements include some guidance and standard contract
provisions--for example that address contractor safeguards for
personal information. However, the policies and procedures available
in DOD's and HHS's FAR guidance do not contain effective agency
management controls for sensitive information needed to help ensure
contractor compliance, prevent contractor disclosure and misuse, and
promote contractor accountability. Such guidance could help
contracting and program officials incorporate safeguards into their
contract actions for protecting all types of relevant sensitive
information contractors may access, such as agency sensitive
information. At the contract level, almost half of the 42 contract
actions reviewed did not include solicitation and contract provisions
that safeguarded against unauthorized contractor disclosure and
inappropriate use of sensitive information contractors may access in
program offices during the course of contract performance.[Footnote
15] In cases where there was agency policy to include contract
provisions to protect sensitive information on all contracts, such as
regarding the medical privacy of individuals, it was not incorporated
in 5 of the 42 contract actions that we reviewed. Additionally, DOD
and HHS lack guidance on the use of nondisclosure agreements, while
DHS has found that these help improve accountability by informing
contractors of their responsibilities and the consequences that may
result from their failure to meet those responsibilities.
Attributes of Safeguards Needed in Agency Guidance and Contracts to
Protect Sensitive Information:
Contractor and subcontractor employees can be responsible for carrying
out a range of mission-critical tasks--including studying ways to
acquire desired capabilities, developing contract requirements, and
advising or assisting on source selection, budget planning, financial
management, and regulations development--potentially requiring access
to many types of sensitive information. Agencies can use their FAR
supplement authority to issue guidance, which may include contract
provisions to establish contractor responsibility for safeguarding
sensitive information.[Footnote 16]
Review of agency practices and discussions with government security
and contracting officials identified three key attributes for
assessing the extent that agencies' guidance or the FAR contain
effective safeguards for sensitive information in acquisition guidance
and contracts. On the basis of these sources, in order to have more
effective safeguards in place, contracts should contain provisions
that (1) describe the relevant scope of sensitive information under
the agency's authority or control that should be protected if
contractors require access to it for contract purposes; (2) require
the contractor to refrain from disclosing such sensitive information
to anyone except as needed for contract performance; and (3) address
conflicts of interest or other misuse by prohibiting the contractor
from using such sensitive information for any purpose other than
contract performance.
Agency FAR guidance should help contracting and program officials
incorporate effective safeguards for sensitive information into their
contract actions by including certain management control practices. We
identified a range of management control practices sometimes
incorporated into acquisition guidance to help prevent contractor
disclosure and misuse, and promote contractor accountability for
sensitive information breaches that harm important interests. These
control practices include requiring contractors to (1) train or inform
employees on their obligations to maintain confidentiality and not
misuse sensitive information; (2) obtain written consent from the
agency to disclose sensitive information; (3) pass sensitive
information provisions to subcontractors; (4) execute a nondisclosure
agreement for each employee and subcontractor as a condition of access
to sensitive information; (5) promptly notify key agency officials of
the misuse or unauthorized disclosure of sensitive information; and
(6) be informed of the consequences for violations.
Agency Guidance for Two of Three Agencies Reviewed Lacks Needed
Safeguards for Contractor Protection of Sensitive Information:
Our review found DOD, DHS, and HHS all have guidance that supplements
the FAR and addresses requirements or standard contract provisions for
contractor protection of certain categories of sensitive information.
For example, DOD supplements the protection of individual privacy
requirements contained in the FAR by incorporating references to the
agency rules and regulations.[Footnote 17] HHS also supplements the
FAR with detailed policy that establishes Privacy Act requirements and
requires the inclusion of contract provisions to protect the
confidentiality of records and the privacy of individuals in contracts
where the Privacy Act is not applicable but the contract would involve
the collection of individually identifiable personal information by
the contractors.[Footnote 18]
However, with respect to other key attributes available in agency FAR
policies and procedures reviewed at DOD, DHS, and HHS, the agencies'
guidance differs in how well they help contracting and program
officials incorporate necessary safeguards for sensitive information
into their contract actions. Of the guidance analyzed at the three
agencies, only DHS established effective management control practices
through standard contract provisions in its FAR supplement and related
guidance requiring contractors to safeguard sensitive information
accessed by employees. In contrast, the FAR guidance of DOD and HHS
does not contain effective agency management controls for sensitive
information needed to help ensure contractor compliance, prevent
contractor disclosure and misuse, and promote contractor
accountability. (See appendix III for the standard contract provisions
we identified in DHS, DOD, and HHS FAR supplements.)
As shown in table 2, our analysis of agency guidance included in the
DHS FAR supplement found that it contained five of six effective
management control practices consistent with key attributes for
establishing safeguards for sensitive information. For example, the
DHS FAR supplement and related guidance aims to (1) make contractors
aware of their responsibilities for maintaining confidentiality of
sensitive information; (2) address conflicts of interest and potential
misuse by prohibiting use of agency information processed, stored, or
transmitted by the contractor for any purpose other than contract
performance; and (3) deter noncompliance with these requirements and
ensure accountability by explaining consequences related to
violations. According to agency acquisition policy officials,
recognition within DHS of the need for contractor safeguards for
homeland security-sensitive information likely led to the
establishment of extensive requirements when the agency updated its
interim FAR supplement and related guidance in 2006. On the other
hand, DHS acquisition policy and security officials acknowledge that
the agency's FAR supplement and contract clause do not directly
specify contractor responsibilities for promptly notifying contracting
officers of unauthorized use or disclosure of sensitive information.
[Footnote 19] Prompt contractor notification to key government
officials is critical to avoid internal delays that would prevent
officials from being aware of the unauthorized use or disclosure;
delay agency decisions about how to respond; and deny the opportunity
for affected parties to take precautions.
Table 2: Analysis of Control Practices in Agency FAR Supplements for
Safeguarding Sensitive Information Accessed by Contractors:
Applicable FAR supplement guidance: DHS; HSAR Section 3004.470--
Security requirements for access to unclassified facilities,
Information Technology resources and sensitive information[A];
Requires contractor employee training on protection and disclosure of
sensitive information: [Check];
Requires written consent to disclose: [Check];
Requires prompt notification to agency of unauthorized disclosure or
misuse: [Empty];
Requires employees sign nondisclosure agreements: [Check];
Requires passing of safeguards to subcontractors: [Check];
Explains that there are consequences for violations: [Check].
Applicable FAR supplement guidance: DOD; DFARS Subsection 204.404-70--
directs contracting officers to use the clause, Disclosure of
Information[B], when the contractor will have access to or generate
unclassified information that may be sensitive and inappropriate to
release to the public;
Requires contractor employee training on protection and disclosure of
sensitive information: [Empty];
Requires written consent to disclose: [Check];
Requires prompt notification to agency of unauthorized disclosure or
misuse: [Empty];
Requires employees sign nondisclosure agreements: [Empty];
Requires passing of safeguards to subcontractors: [Check];
Explains that there are consequences for violations: [Empty].
Applicable FAR supplement guidance: HHS; HHSAR Subpart 324.70--
Confidentiality of Information (deleted)[C];
Requires contractor employee training on protection and disclosure of
sensitive information: [Empty];
Requires written consent to disclose: [Check];
Requires prompt notification to agency of unauthorized disclosure or
misuse: [Empty];
Requires employees sign nondisclosure agreements: [Empty];
Requires passing of safeguards to subcontractors: [Empty];
Explains that there are consequences for violations: [Empty].
Source: GAO analysis of DOD, DHS, and HHS data.
Notes: Data are from agency FAR supplements. See appendix III for the
full text of the DHS, DOD, and HHS contract clauses cited in this
analysis.
[A] The Department of Homeland Security Acquisition Regulation (HSAR)
directs contracting officers to include the basic clause, HSAR
Subsection 3052.204-71, Contractor Employee Access, when contractor
employees require recurring access to government facilities or access
to sensitive information. Subsection 3004.470-2 requires compliance
with the policies and procedures in a DHS security management
directive that expressly requires contractor and consultants to
execute the DHS Form 11000-6, Sensitive But Unclassified Information
Non-disclosure Agreement, as a condition of access to sensitive
information. See appendix IV for detailed information about DHS
contractor nondisclosure agreement requirements.
[B] Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS)
Subsection 252.204-7000. Our analysis on this chart is limited to the
noted DFARS clause and corresponding subsection. Other DFARS clauses
may contain some of these safeguards to protect sensitive information,
but they are limited to specific categories of information. For
example, as a condition of access to another contractor's technical
data or computer software delivered to the government, DFARS 227.7103-
7 provides that an authorized company representative may execute a
nondisclosure agreement directly with the other contractor that
prohibits (1) use of such data for other than government contract
purposes and (2) release, display, or disclosure of such technical
data or computer software without the express written permission of
the other contractor. Under this DFARS provision, execution of this
nondisclosure agreement is for the benefit of the other contractor,
and the recipient contractor agrees to hold harmless the government
from every liability arising out of the misuse of the other
contractor's technical data or computer software.
[C] Contracting officers were directed to use the clause in Department
of Health and Human Services Acquisition Regulation (HHSAR) Subsection
352.224-70, Confidentiality of Information, whenever the need existed
to keep information confidential, such as when contracts involved the
use of proprietary plans or processes or confidential financial
information of organizations other than the contractor's. When HHS
revised its FAR supplement effective as of January 2010, this guidance
was removed in its entirety from the HHSAR.
[End of table]
DHS's guidance establishes stronger safeguards for sensitive
information than what we found at DOD and HHS in their FAR
supplements. In contrast with the DHS guidance, the analysis in table
2 shows that DOD's FAR supplement does not include the same amount of
detail as to how contractors are to safeguard sensitive information.
At present, DOD's FAR supplement is limited to requiring the use of a
disclosure of information clause in solicitations and contracts when
contractors have access to unclassified information that may be
sensitive and inappropriate for release to the public--for example,
DOD officials said the clause authorizes use in a contractor's press
and marketing materials.[Footnote 20] In addition, since HHS revised
its FAR supplement as of January 2010,[Footnote 21] guidance and a
contract provision that required contractors to obtain written consent
before disclosing certain kinds of sensitive information--not already
subject to FAR and agency privacy restrictions--was deleted in its
entirety.[Footnote 22] According to the director for acquisition
policy, HHS deleted the "Confidentiality of Information" clause
because the need for agency guidance will be obviated by pending
changes to the FAR expected later in 2010.[Footnote 23]
Besides the supplemental FAR guidance, agencies have developed other
policies and control practices to establish additional contractor
responsibilities for safeguarding certain categories of sensitive
information obtained during contract performance. For example, a 2007
privacy breach involving a DOD contractor that potentially compromised
the personal health information of 580,000 households led the privacy
office in DOD's component agency TRICARE Management Activity (TMA) to
determine that the agency's contract provisions did not adequately
protect sensitive information.[Footnote 24] According to the TMA
privacy office director, most TMA contracts before 2007 did not
specifically require the contractor to safeguard personal health
information, notify DOD or beneficiaries of privacy breaches, or to
mitigate any harm, such as paying for the cost of free credit
monitoring to affected individuals.
To address this problem, TMA has required since 2007 that standard
contract provisions be included whenever a contract is awarded that
requires either the use of or access to personal information. The
required contract language is posted on TMA's Web site and imposes
protections for the privacy and security of personally identifiable
information and protected health information. It seeks to ensure that
contractors understand their responsibility in protecting TRICARE
beneficiaries' sensitive information. Similarly, HHS's Centers for
Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) issued an acquisition policy and
procedure notice, which took effect in 2005, to advise contracting
staff of the requirement to use a clause for contractor protection of
health information. This standard CMS clause had been revised to
integrate the HIPAA security standards along with the privacy
standards that were previously adopted in standard contract
provisions.[Footnote 25]
Almost Half of Contract Actions Reviewed Lack Contract Provisions That
Fully Safeguard Sensitive Information:
For our analysis of contract documents for 42 contract actions at DHS,
DOD, and HHS that involved contractor employees supporting mission-
critical tasks, in order to be considered to fully safeguard all types
of sensitive information, a contract had to contain provisions that
specifically required contractors to refrain from (1) disclosing
sensitive information to anyone except as needed for contract
performance and (2) using such sensitive information for any purpose
other than contract performance. In addition, the provisions had to
cover the relevant types of sensitive information that may be accessed
by a contractor during performance. As shown in table 3, our analysis
found that slightly more than half of contract actions reviewed--23 of
42--contained contract provisions that fully safeguard the
confidentiality and appropriate use of all types of sensitive
information. In contrast, the remaining 19 contract actions reviewed
did not extend safeguards to all relevant types of sensitive
information that contractors may have had access to through the
program offices they support. In the absence of such safeguards, there
is higher risk of unauthorized disclosure or misuse of sensitive
information by contractors.[Footnote 26]
Table 3: Analysis of Contract Provisions Establishing Contractor
Safeguards for Sensitive Information:
Agency: DHS;
Number of contracts reviewed: 14;
Presence of provisions safeguarding sensitive information[A]: 11;
Absence of provisions safeguarding sensitive information: 3.
Agency: DOD;
Number of contracts reviewed: 18;
Presence of provisions safeguarding sensitive information[A]: 9;
Absence of provisions safeguarding sensitive information: 9.
Agency: HHS;
Number of contracts reviewed: 10;
Presence of provisions safeguarding sensitive information[A]: 3;
Absence of provisions safeguarding sensitive information: 7.
Agency: Total;
Number of contracts reviewed: 42;
Presence of provisions safeguarding sensitive information[A]: 23;
Absence of provisions safeguarding sensitive information: 19.
Source: GAO analysis of agency contracts.
[A] Analysis of 23 contract actions found evidence of contract
provisions that established requirements for appropriate disclosure,
handling, access, and restrictions on misuse of a full range of
nonpublic agency information, proprietary information, and privacy
information.
[End of table]
Of the 19 contracts reviewed that did not have provisions for all
safeguards, our content analysis found that one HHS blanket purchase
agreement and an associated order we reviewed contained no evidence of
contract provisions for contractor safeguarding of sensitive
information, except for standard FAR clauses related to the Privacy
Act in the base contract. In addition, some contract provisions
included in 18 other contract actions provided too few safeguards,
given the range of tasks being performed and the potential
opportunities to gain access to many types of sensitive information.
For example, at HHS several contract actions specified that
contractors must safeguard certain types of sensitive information, but
did not specify contractor protection of agency-sensitive information
from nondisclosure or misuse. In other cases, clauses addressed
limitations on the disclosure of certain types of sensitive
information, but not its misuse, and therefore did not fully safeguard
these types of information. Some HHS contract actions require that
contractors perform acquisition functions related to other
contractors, such as strategic planning in support of future task
awards or auditing business proposals, and thus could require access
to proprietary information. These contract actions did not always
include safeguards addressing limits on unauthorized disclosure and
misuse of proprietary information. Similarly, several DOD contract
actions included provisions to prevent contractors from disclosing any
nonpublic information they obtained during contract performance, but
provisions to prohibit contractors from misusing the information for
purposes other than contract performance were absent.
In cases where there was agency policy to include specific contract
provisions to protect sensitive information, it was not incorporated
in five of the contract actions we reviewed. For example, 3 DHS task
orders of the 14 contract actions reviewed did not include the
contract clause required when contractors need recurring access to
government facilities or sensitive information.[Footnote 27] At HHS, 2
task orders of the 10 contract actions reviewed did not include
standard contract provisions regarding HIPAA privacy and security
standards required by agency policy to be in all contracts.
Two of Three Agencies Reviewed Lack Guidance on Using Contractor
Nondisclosure Agreements for Full Range of Sensitive Information:
Several of the contract actions we reviewed used nondisclosure
agreements as a mechanism to help protect sensitive information from
conflicts of interest and preserve its confidentiality. These
agreements generally outline the exchange of confidential information
or knowledge that at least two parties need to share for certain
purposes, but wish to restrict access to by third parties. When used
by agencies as a condition of contractor access to sensitive
information, a nondisclosure agreement may serve several important
accountability purposes. These include informing contractor employees
and subcontractors of (1) the trust that is placed in them by
providing them access to sensitive information; (2) their
responsibilities to protect that information from unauthorized
disclosure and use; and (3) the consequences that may result from
their failure to meet those responsibilities.
All of the agencies we reviewed had established guidance requiring
contractor employees participating in source-selection activities to
sign an agreement to not disclose procurement sensitive, proprietary,
or source-selection information. Beyond addressing this one area of
sensitive information however, only DHS and TMA (in DOD) had guidance
requiring the use of standard contractor nondisclosure agreements for
a broader range of sensitive information that may be handled by
contractors. Under the DHS and TMA guidance, certain contracts are to
contain provisions that require contractors to submit to a designated
agency official an executed nondisclosure agreement for each employee
and subcontractor within a stipulated time following contract award or
before they are given access to certain types of agency sensitive
information. Appendix IV provides examples of standard nondisclosure
agreements we reviewed.
DHS and TMA security and acquisition policy officials responsible for
jointly developing agency guidance on nondisclosure agreements view
these agreements as critical to promoting contractor accountability.
According to the DHS administrative security chief, the agencywide
nondisclosure agreement was developed in coordination with agency
acquisition policy, information technology (IT) security, and privacy
officials to educate contractor personnel on the agency's standards
for safeguarding sensitive information and provide a mechanism to hold
them accountable should they violate the terms of the agreement. The
agencywide form was also developed to eliminate use of nonstandard
forms to cover different types of sensitive information that were
causing confusion and required contractor employees to sign multiple
forms.[Footnote 28] According to DOD's acquisition executive for TMA,
having contractor employees sign nondisclosure agreements provides
additional benefits for the government by (1) requiring that
contractors will protect and not disclose sensitive information; (2)
protecting against conflicts of interest that could occur if
contractors use sensitive information for future competitive
advantage; and (3) making contractors and their employees aware of the
government's expectations and their obligations to safeguard sensitive
information.
As shown in table 4, due to the agencywide use of nondisclosure
agreements at DHS and DOD's TMA, 20 of 42 contract actions reviewed
contained contract provisions requiring nondisclosure agreements for
each employee and subcontractor. All 10 of the Air Force contracts
reviewed and 1 contract at HHS required contractors to enter into
third-party agreements with other contractors about the
confidentiality and use of their proprietary information obtained
during contract performance.
Table 4: Analysis of Contract Requirements for Nondisclosure
Agreements:
Agency: DHS;
Number of contract actions reviewed: 14;
Contract provisions relating to nondisclosure agreements:
Requires contractor to submit executed nondisclosure agreement for
each individual as a condition of access: 12;
Requires contractor agreements with third-parties to protect their
proprietary information: 0;
Does not require nondisclosure agreements: 2[A].
Agency: DOD: TMA;
Number of contract actions reviewed: 8;
Contract provisions relating to nondisclosure agreements:
Requires contractor to submit executed nondisclosure agreement for
each individual as a condition of access: 8;
Requires contractor agreements with third-parties to protect their
proprietary information: 0;
Does not require nondisclosure agreements: 0.
Agency: DOD: Air Force;
Number of contract actions reviewed: 10;
Contract provisions relating to nondisclosure agreements:
Requires contractor to submit executed nondisclosure agreement for
each individual as a condition of access: 0;
Requires contractor agreements with third-parties to protect their
proprietary information: 10;
Does not require nondisclosure agreements: 0.
Agency: HHS;
Number of contract actions reviewed: 10;
Contract provisions relating to nondisclosure agreements:
Requires contractor to submit executed nondisclosure agreement for
each individual as a condition of access: 0;
Requires contractor agreements with third-parties to protect their
proprietary information: 1;
Does not require nondisclosure agreements: 9.
Agency: Total;
Number of contract actions reviewed: 42;
Contract provisions relating to nondisclosure agreements:
Requires contractor to submit executed nondisclosure agreement for
each individual as a condition of access: 20;
Requires contractor agreements with third-parties to protect their
proprietary information: 11;
Does not require nondisclosure agreements: 11.
Source: GAO analysis of agency contracts and task orders.
[A] DHS policy requires nondisclosure agreements to be executed by
contractors as a condition of access to sensitive information.
Therefore, these contractors may have been required to sign
nondisclosure agreements, but this requirement was not clearly stated
in two contracts.
[End of table]
One case study of an Air Force contract illustrated the practical
challenges for agency monitoring of such third-party agreements in
contrast to agency use of its own contractor nondisclosure agreements.
In this case study, although the contractor's conflict of interest
mitigation plan indicated the company maintained nondisclosure
agreements and proprietary protection agreements with many third-party
contractors, no copies of executed nondisclosure agreements were
available from the Air Force contracting and program officials
responsible for administering the contract. In addition, officials
told us they knew that the contractor had entered into such
agreements, but they had not reviewed them.[Footnote 29]
We discussed a less challenging approach for implementing agency
contractor nondisclosure agreements with the Department of the
Treasury's (Treasury) contract administrator responsible for
management and oversight of contractors and financial agents
supporting the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP).[Footnote 30] He
agrees with DHS and TMA views that nondisclosure agreements are
critical to promoting contractor accountability for maintaining
confidentiality of sensitive information and providing other benefits,
such as helping to prevent conflicts of interest that could arise from
contractor misuse of the information. Treasury uses an alternative way
to implement these agreements that reduces administrative burden
without compromising contractor compliance for their use. Language
included in certain TARP Financial Agency Agreements requires the
financial agent to have each employee and all affiliate and contractor
personnel to whom nonpublic information is or may be disclosed execute
the agency's nondisclosure agreement form--included as an exhibit to
the agreement--as a condition of access to sensitive government
information.[Footnote 31] According to the Treasury official, it is
better to have the contractor responsible for retaining the executed
agreements in its own files, rather than have the government
contracting officer or program office retain them. The official
explained that as long as the terms of the contract require
contractors to certify to the government they have collected the
agency's nondisclosure agreement for all individuals they assign to
perform on the contract, and the agreements are available to the
government for inspection, it is better to hold contractors
accountable for retaining the signed agreements.
Efforts Underway to Improve Governmentwide Guidance in the FAR for
Contractor Access to Sensitive Information:
The FAR Council in recent years has made progress improving guidance
for security and oversight related to contractor access to sensitive
government facilities and information systems, but challenges remain.
While the FAR establishes governmentwide guidance on certain
contractor sensitive-information safeguards prescribed in statute--for
example, to require contractor protection of individual privacy--FAR
guidance does not address certain key areas relating to contractor
access to sensitive information. Several amendments are pending before
the FAR Council to implement recommended changes and to improve FAR
guidance in the complex areas involving contractor access to sensitive
information. Such changes to the FAR could provide agencies clear
guidance on the use of contractor nondisclosure agreements as a
condition of access to sensitive information and could include
requirements for contractors to promptly notify agencies of
unauthorized disclosure and misuse of sensitive information to enable
timely decisions regarding an agency's response when use of sensitive
information is compromised. With the rulemaking process underway to
develop these amendments, the FAR Council has an opportunity to
consider additional changes to strengthen FAR guidance to ensure
remaining gaps in contractor safeguards identified in this review are
addressed.
Governmentwide Guidance Currently Addresses Certain Contractor
Safeguards for Sensitive Information:
The FAR is the primary regulation that provides uniform policies and
procedures for acquisitions by executive agencies.[Footnote 32] During
the acquisition process, the FAR emphasizes basic planning that has to
be coordinated among agency personnel responsible for significant
aspects of the acquisition, such as contracting, fiscal, legal, and
technical personnel.[Footnote 33] In describing agency needs during
acquisition planning, the FAR directs agencies to address all
significant considerations that will control each acquisition,
including security considerations for acquisitions requiring routine
contractor physical access to a federal facility or IT system.
The FAR has several provisions that establish policy and contract
clauses implementing requirements prescribed in statute or executive
order for contractor protection of certain categories of sensitive
information, such as information related to the privacy of
individuals. When these FAR provisions, which are described in table
5, are applicable, certain sensitive-information requirements are
included in solicitation and contract provisions that are intended to
safeguard procurement integrity, classified information,
organizational conflicts of interest, and privacy.[Footnote 34]
Agencies use this guidance to incorporate requirements during
acquisition planning and when describing agency needs.
Table 5: FAR Contract Provisions for Safeguarding Certain Types of
Sensitive Information:
Covered information: Source selection;
FAR provisions obliging contractor employee authorized use and
confidentiality: Section 3.104--Procurement Integrity. Both federal
employees and contractor employees that have access to contractor bid
or proposal information or source-selection information are subject to
laws and regulations to limit disclosure of protected procurement-
related information. Violations are punishable by both civil and
criminal penalties and administrative actions, such as contract
cancellation. 41 U.S.C. § 423.
Covered information: Classified;
FAR provisions obliging contractor employee authorized use and
confidentiality: Subpart 4.4--Safeguarding Classified Information
Within Industry. Contracting officers shall review all proposed
solicitations to determine whether access to classified information
may be required by offerors or by a contractor during contract
performance. If so, the contracting officer shall follow the relevant
agency's procedures for security clearances. Contracting officers
shall also include the appropriate security requirements clause
(52.204-2) in solicitations and contracts for security safeguards.
During the award phase of a "classified" contract, contracting
officers for agencies covered by the national industrial security
program shall use the Contract Security Classification Specification
(DD Form 254) to inform contractors and subcontractors of the security
classifications and requirements assigned to the various documents,
materials, tasks, and subcontracts.
Covered information: Business proprietary;
FAR provisions obliging contractor employee authorized use and
confidentiality: Subsection 9.505-4--Obtaining Access to Proprietary
Information. FAR subpart 9.5 requires contracting officers to identify
and evaluate potential organizational conflicts of interest prior to
contract award and take steps to address potential conflicts that they
determine to be significant. The contracting officer may use
solicitation provisions or a contract clause to require agreements
about restrictions on the use of other contractors' proprietary
information obtained during the course of contract performance to
prevent the contractor from gaining an unfair advantage. These
restrictions encourage companies to provide information necessary for
contract performance. If the contracting officer imposes the
restrictions, the contractor that gains access to proprietary
information of other contractors must agree with other companies to
protect their information from unauthorized use or disclosure and
refrain from using the information for any purpose other than
necessary for contract performance. If such agreements are required,
the contracting officer shall obtain copies of these agreements and
ensure that they are properly executed.
Covered information: Personal;
FAR provisions obliging contractor employee authorized use and
confidentiality: Subpart 24.1--Protection of Individual Privacy. In
implementing federal privacy requirements the FAR requires that when
an agency contract will involve the design, development, or operation
of a system of records on individuals to accomplish an agency
function, the contracting officer shall (1) ensure that the contract
identifies the system of records on individuals and the design,
development, or operation work to be performed, and (2) make available
agency rules and regulations implementing the Privacy Act. A
contractor and its employees may be subject to criminal penalties for
violation of the Privacy Act. 5 U.S.C. § 552a.
Source: GAO analysis of the FAR.
[End of table]
Finally, to address the need for improved governmentwide contracting
guidance required by presidential directive or law and to assist
agencies in addressing identified risks from contractor access to
sensitive federal facilities and information systems, OFPP and the FAR
Council revised contractor personnel and IT security requirements in
the FAR. Key aspects of the revised contractor personnel and IT
security safeguards are summarized as follows:
* Securing personal identity verification of contractor personnel--in
2007 the FAR was amended in part to implement the August 2004 Homeland
Security Presidential Directive 12 (HSPD-12), which required the
establishment of a governmentwide standard for secure and reliable
forms of identification for federal employees and contractors alike.
[Footnote 35] Implementing HSPD-12 requirements through contract
provisions may help address the risks of contractors gaining
unauthorized physical or electronic access to federal information or
contractors using outmoded identification cards that can be easily
forged, stolen, or altered to allow unauthorized access.
* Strengthening federal information security oversight of contractor
IT operations--in 2005 an interim rule amended the FAR to implement
the Federal Information Security Management Act of 2002 (FISMA)
information-technology-security provisions.[Footnote 36] According to
the FAR Council, the addition of specific FISMA-related provisions was
intended to provide clear, consistent guidance to acquisition
officials and program managers, and to encourage and strengthen
communication with IT security officials, chief information officers,
and other affected parties.
See appendix V for greater detail on these changes to the FAR.
Addition of Recommended Changes in FAR Contract Provisions Underway to
Improve Sensitive Information Safeguards:
There have been numerous recommendations in recent years for improved
governmentwide guidance and contract provisions for contractor
protection of sensitive information. The emphasis has been on
standardizing approaches and establishing accountability mechanisms
when access to information is compromised. Problems and
recommendations to address them include the following:
* In 2007, the Acquisition Advisory Panel found that increased use of
contractor employees in the government workforce to support the
evaluation of other contractors raises questions regarding the
potential for organizational conflicts of interest and how to preserve
the confidentiality of proprietary information. To address such risks,
the panel recommended that the FAR Council provide additional
regulatory guidance for contractor access to and responsibilities for
protecting proprietary information belonging to other companies. It
specifically called for developing standardized contract provisions
and approaches for agencies' use of nondisclosure agreements and in
creating remedies for improper information sharing. It also suggested
the use of standardized clauses for organizational conflicts of
interest to address issues of unfair competitive advantage when a firm
gains access to information as part of its performance of government
contract responsibilities.
* Similarly, on the basis of lessons learned from agency responses to
loss of personally identifiable information, in April 2007 we noted
that agencies need to clearly define contractor responsibilities for
protecting privacy information.[Footnote 37] In this report,
contractors were prominently involved in privacy data breaches at
three of six agencies reviewed, including one case in which a
contractor inadvertently released informational compact discs to
several FOIA requesters that contained Social Security numbers and tax
identification data on 350,000 individuals receiving government
program payments. We noted that contractor obligations for mitigating
damage from data breaches, such as notifying affected individuals or
providing credit monitoring, may be unclear unless specified in the
contract. Consistent with and in response to our report, DHS
acquisition policy officials told us in June 2009 of their
recommendations for revisions to the FAR Subpart 24.1 to (1) expand
existing Privacy Act coverage and (2) implement a standard approach
that promotes contractor accountability. According to DHS officials,
to avoid agency-by-agency development of inconsistent clauses or other
contractual terms, the FAR needs a revised privacy policy and clause
for establishing basic government and contractor and subcontractor
expectations, roles, and responsibilities--including prompt breach
notification procedures for contractors to inform officials of privacy
data breaches to enable the agency's timely response.
* Additionally, in 2008 we reported that certain defense contractor
employees who support key mission-critical tasks that have the
potential to significantly influence DOD decisions are not subject to
the same ethical safeguards as federal employees.[Footnote 38]
Furthermore, no FAR policy obliges government agencies using these
contractor employees to require that they be free from personal
conflicts of interest or addresses the issue of contractor employee
misuse of the government's nonpublic information obtained while
performing work under a contract for private gain. To address this
problem, we recommended that DOD develop and implement policy that
would require a contract clause, among other safeguards, to prohibit
contractor personnel from using nonpublic government information for
personal gain. DOD postponed implementing the recommendation once OFPP
and the FAR Council began responding to legislation from
Congress.[Footnote 39] Among other changes, the legislation required a
standard policy to be developed and issued to prevent personal
conflicts of interest by contractor employees performing acquisition
functions closely associated with inherently governmental functions.
This policy was to require each contractor whose employees performed
these functions to prohibit covered employees with access to nonpublic
government information from using it for personal gain.
In response, since 2007 the FAR Council has opened several cases,
shown in table 6, to amend the FAR to provide additional regulatory
coverage and clauses. These open cases, with implementing regulations
pending as of July 2010, have significant potential for addressing
these identified problems. Discussions with OFPP and DOD officials
responsible for these FAR changes, and review of information they
provided on these cases, indicate that the steps the FAR Council has
been taking to revise governmentwide guidance are consistent with the
recommendations. For example, a review of information on these pending
FAR cases indicates significant changes are being considered to amend
the FAR so that it addresses access to nonpublic information and
conflicts of interest. Changes being considered also contain other
policies and clauses consistent with safeguards we identified for
protecting contractor sensitive information, and these changes may
mitigate the risks of unauthorized disclosure and misuse. FAR cases
generally follow a lengthy process that allows the public, as well as
federal agencies, to comment on proposed changes to the FAR. Because
of other rulemaking priorities and the many steps involved--including
legal and interagency reviews--FAR Council officials told us the
rulemaking process could take many more months to complete.
Table 6: Status of Pending FAR Cases to Revise Policies and Clauses
for Contractor Use and Confidentiality of Sensitive Information:
FAR case: 2007-019, Contractor Access to Non-public Information;
Synopsis: Consideration of how to safeguard nonpublic information by
including provisions and clauses in solicitations and contracts for
the use of nondisclosure agreements; information sharing among
contractors; and remedies for improper disclosure;
Significance: Could potentially address gaps in the FAR's regulatory
coverage responsive to Acquisition Advisory Panel's recommended
improvements;
Status as of July 2010: FAR case opened in 2007; proposed rule has yet
to be published in Federal Register for consideration of public
comment. FAR staff is awaiting additional government input on draft
proposed rule after review by defense and civilian agency acquisition
councils.
FAR case: 2007-018, Organizational Conflicts of Interest;
Synopsis: Consideration of whether current guidance on organizational
conflicts of interest is adequate for assisting current needs of
agencies or whether providing standard provisions or clauses might be
helpful;
Significance: Could potentially address Acquisition Advisory Panel
recommendations by changing current guidance under FAR 9.505-4 that
allows agencies to impose restrictions on contractors gaining access
to proprietary information from others in the performance of a
government contract to avoid unfair advantage and protect their
information from unauthorized use or disclosure;
Status as of July 2010: FAR case opened in 2007; proposed rule has yet
to be published in Federal Register for consideration of public
comment. Draft proposed rule is under review by OFPP.
FAR case: 2008-025, Preventing Personal Conflicts of Interest by
Contractor Employees Performing Acquisition Functions;
Synopsis: Implements § 841(a) of the Duncan Hunter National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009, Pub. L. No. 110-417, that
required OFPP to develop and issue a policy and clauses for inclusion
in solicitations, contracts, task orders, and delivery orders.
Proposes a definition of "non-public government information," adapted
from government ethics rules, as meaning any information that a
covered employee gains by reason of work under a contract and that the
covered employee knows, or reasonably should know, has not been made
public (e.g., proprietary contractor information in the possession of
the government);
Significance: Also may address GAO recommendation for DOD to develop a
policy that will prohibit contractors performing acquisition functions
with access to nonpublic government information obtained while
performing work under the contract from using it for personal gain.
Use of the proposed clause would require contractors to obtain
nondisclosure agreements from covered employees and report to the
contracting officer any personal conflict of interest violation. Also
lists remedies available to the government if a contractor fails to
comply with the requirements, such as payment suspension or contract
termination;
Status as of July 2010: FAR case opened in 2008; proposed rule
published in Federal Register for consideration of public comment in
November 2009.[A] Public comments have been addressed by FAR staff for
draft final FAR rule; awaiting interagency concurrence on open issues
before final rule can be published in Federal Register.
FAR case: 2009-022, Security of Systems Handling Sensitive Personally
Identifiable Information;
Synopsis: Would establish a uniform approach for handling of sensitive
Privacy Act information;
Significance: Could potentially address GAO recommendation and DHS-
proposed revision;
Status as of July 2010: FAR case opened in 2009; proposed rule yet to
be published in Federal Register for consideration of public comment.
Draft proposed rule is under OMB review.
Source: GAO analysis of FAR Council information.
[A] The FAR Council issued the proposed rule, Federal Acquisition
Regulation: FAR Case 2008-025, Preventing Personal Conflicts of
Interest for Contractor Employees Performing Acquisition Functions.
Public comments were due in January 2010. 74 Fed. Reg. 58584-89 (Nov.
13, 2009).
[End of table]
Opportunity Exists for FAR Council to Consider Additional Changes in
the FAR to Further Address Safeguards for Contractor Access to
Sensitive Information:
Until the FAR Council completes the rulemaking process for the pending
cases listed in table 6, it is unclear the extent to which the changes
will address risks and better control contractor confidentiality and
authorized use of sensitive information. With regard to unauthorized
disclosure and use of sensitive information, these risks include (1)
unauthorized access by contractor employees or subcontractors not
involved with contract performance, (2) conflicts of interest in using
sensitive information for financial gain or unfair competitive
advantage, and (3) unauthorized disclosure.
Similarly to issues we identified in agency guidance, our review found
that FAR guidance does not address certain areas relating to
contractor access to sensitive information. Moreover, rather than
having agencies develop stronger safeguards individually, the FAR
Council is developing a standardized approach to address many of these
areas. This is particularly relevant with regard to changes being
considered under the open FAR Case 2007-019, Contractor Access to Non-
Public Information, listed above. Nevertheless, our review of
potential changes to FAR guidance identified two key areas yet to be
addressed where the FAR does not contain guidance that could help
agencies address problems identified in this report.
The first key area is the development and use of contractor
nondisclosure agreements as a condition of access to sensitive
information. Additional FAR guidance also could ensure nondisclosure
agreements used across the government include clear and complete
information to contractors. Without uniform emphasis in the FAR on how
agencies use contractor nondisclosure agreements, contractors may not
be adequately informed of their responsibilities to protect that
information from unauthorized disclosure and use and the consequences
that may result from their failure to meet those responsibilities.
The second key area is the establishment of requirements for
contractors to provide agencies prompt notification of deviations by
their employees or subcontractors from provisions for use and
confidentiality of all types of sensitive information.[Footnote 40]
Without such guidance in the FAR, contractors may not be adequately
required to make key government officials aware of unauthorized
disclosure or inappropriate use of sensitive information involving
their employees. A contractor's prompt notification is critical to
avoiding delays in internal agency decisions about how to respond to
the misuse or unauthorized disclosure of sensitive information and the
opportunity for affected parties to take precautions. Also, without
such guidance, agencies may be less able to act on a timely basis to
hold contractors accountable for their failure to properly use and
maintain confidentiality of sensitive information.
Conclusions:
The government's extensive use of contractors in the multisector
workforce to support management activities and administrative
functions, coupled with contractors' increasing access to government
facilities, has in recent years prompted several constructive efforts
by the FAR Council to establish uniform contract provisions. However,
of the three agencies reviewed for this report, only DHS has
established guidance for controlling contractor use and limiting
unauthorized disclosure of sensitive information obtained during
contract performance. OFPP and the FAR Council have recognized that
FAR guidance does not address certain key areas. Rather than having
agencies develop their own guidance and clauses individually, several
amendments are pending to improve guidance and contract clauses in the
FAR. While these are steps in the right direction, opportunities exist
to address certain gaps we identified in pending FAR guidance. These
include the need for guidance on agency use of contractor
nondisclosure agreements and the need to establish requirements for
contractors to promptly notify agencies of unauthorized disclosure or
misuse of sensitive information, which is critical to enabling timely
agency decisions and responses.
Recommendations for Executive Action:
To address the need for clearly defining contractor responsibilities
in governmentwide guidance in the FAR, we recommend that the
Administrator of OFPP ensures that the FAR Council incorporates
changes in the FAR that address safeguards for contractor access to
sensitive information by:
* providing guidance to agency acquisition policy officials, in
coordination with IT security and privacy officials, chief information
officers, and other affected parties, on agency development and use of
contractor nondisclosure agreements as a condition of access to
sensitive information; and:
* establishing a requirement for prompt notification to appropriate
agency officials of a contractor's unauthorized disclosure or misuse
of sensitive information so that timely agency responses are
facilitated and appropriate contractor accountability mechanisms can
be enforced.
Agency Comments and Our Evaluation:
We provided a draft of this report to OMB's OFPP, DOD, HHS, and DHS
for review and comment. In oral comments, OFPP generally concurred
with our recommendations. DOD provided technical comments that were
incorporated into the report as appropriate and HHS did not have
comments.
In written comments, included in appendix VI, DHS generally concurred
with our report. However, DHS took exception to the analysis for 1 of
the 14 contract actions reviewed, which we found did not contain
adequate safeguards to protect sensitive information. While we agree
that the task order identified in DHS' response includes contract
provisions with prohibitions against disclosing sensitive information,
the language does not address safeguards to ensure contractors'
appropriate use of sensitive information.
DHS also stated that although this task order lacks a contract clause
required in DHS acquisition regulations, it includes comparable
provisions in the statement of work. We reviewed the task order and
the guidance for the clause HSAR 3052.204-71, Contractor Employee
Access, which requires the use of the clause or one substantially the
same in solicitations and contracts when contractor employees require
recurring access to government facilities or access to sensitive
information. On the basis of our review, we continue to believe that
the task order does not contain HSAR clause 3052.204-71 or a contract
clause that is substantially the same as that clause. Although some
provisions in the task order contain similar information and
requirements, these provisions do not cover the same breadth or detail
as HSAR clause 3052.204-71. For example, the task order does not
include a comprehensive definition section such as the one in HSAR
clause 3052.204-71. Without the use of such comprehensive definitions,
it is not clear that the various provisions of the task order noted by
DHS collectively and effectively protect the same range of sensitive
government information as set forth in HSAR clause 3052.204-71. In
addition, the task order specified in DHS' response does not include
provisions that limit contractors from disclosing sensitive
information without authorization from the contracting officer. Also,
the portions of the statement of work cited as comparable with HSAR
clause 3052.204-71(e) relate specifically to information technology,
and not necessarily to information that contractors and their
employees may otherwise gain access to in the course of their
contractual responsibilities.
DHS also provided technical comments, which were incorporated into the
draft where appropriate.
We are sending copies of this report to the Director of OMB; the
Secretaries of Defense, Homeland Security, and Health and Human
Services; and interested congressional committees. The report also is
available at no charge on GAO's Web site at [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov].
If you or your staff have any questions concerning this report, please
contact me at (202) 512-4841 or needhamjk1@gao.gov. Contact points for
our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found
on the last page of this report. GAO staff who made major
contributions to this report are listed in appendix VII.
Sincerely yours,
Signed by:
John K. Needham:
Director, Acquisition and Sourcing Management:
[End of section]
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology:
To assess the extent that agency guidance and contracts establish
effective safeguards for sensitive information, we identified key
attributes of the safeguards that should be contained in acquisition
guidance and contracts to manage the risks of contractor unauthorized
disclosure and misuse based on (1) review of agency practices related
to controls over contractor access to sensitive information, (2)
review of applicable standards drawn from GAO's Standards for Internal
Control in the Federal Government,[Footnote 41] and (3) discussions
with government security and contracting officials responsible for
administrative, information, and contractor personnel security
functions. Specifically the acquisition guidance and contracts should
contain safeguards that (1) describe the relevant scope of sensitive
information under the agency's authority or control that should be
protected if contractors require access to it for contract purposes,
(2) require the contractor to refrain from disclosing such sensitive
information to anyone except as needed for contract performance, and
(3) prohibit the contractor from using such sensitive information for
any purpose other than contract performance.
To assess the extent to which agency guidance contains safeguards for
contractor protection of sensitive information, we analyzed applicable
guidance available in the respective Federal Acquisition Regulation
(FAR) supplements of the Department of Defense (DOD), the Department
of Homeland Security (DHS), and the Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS). We selected these departments for review because they
ranked among the top procurers of contracted services in fiscal year
2008, based on a review of the Federal Procurement Data System-Next
Generation (FPDS-NG), and because prior GAO work shows that their
component agencies and organizations rely extensively on support
contractors to perform mission-critical tasks that would potentially
require access to sensitive information. We assessed the reliability
of the FPDS-NG data through corroboration with agency officials and
contract files and determined they were sufficiently reliable for our
purposes. We analyzed applicable policy and guidance available from
the departments and some of their selected component agencies and
organizations to identify the extent their guidance provides for
contractor protection of sensitive information, including guidance
contained in agency FAR supplements as well as security and privacy
program policies and procedures applicable to contractor employees. We
also interviewed acquisition policy, security, and privacy officials
to discuss their supplements to FAR guidance and the contract
provisions they use to meet their specific agency needs.
To assess the extent to which agency contracts contain safeguards for
contractor protection of sensitive information, we analyzed DOD, DHS,
and HHS contract actions (defined as a contract, task order, and
blanket purchase agreement and associated order) for services
potentially requiring contractor access to sensitive information from
the following five component agencies or organizations and locations:
* within DOD, the (1) TRICARE Management Activity (TMA) in Falls
Church, Virginia, and the contracting activity supporting TMA at the
U.S. Army Medical Research Acquisition Activity at Fort Detrick,
Maryland, and (2) the Air Force Materiel Command's Electronic Systems
Center at Hanscom Air Force Base, Massachusetts;
* within DHS in Washington, D.C., (3) U.S. Customs and Border
Protection and (4) the Office of Procurement Operations within the
Office of the Chief Procurement Officer, which is the contracting
activity supporting headquarters organizations; and:
* within HHS, the (5) Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services (CMS)
in Baltimore, Maryland.
At each of these five organizations, we selected for review a
nongeneralizable sample of 6 to 10 contract actions (42 in total) in
which contractor employees worked in close proximity to government
employees and provided professional and administrative services that
supported the agencies' missions, in addition to providing a cross
section of contract types and services. In making our selection, we
reviewed lists of contract actions and reported dollar values drawn
from data provided by DOD, DHS, and HHS component agency and
organization officials to confirm that the contract actions belonged
to their agencies and that they involved contractors working on-site
or in close proximity with government employees, to perform services
potentially requiring access to sensitive information.
For each of the 42 contract actions, we analyzed the contract
documentation provided, including base contracts from which task
orders or blanket purchase agreements and their associated orders were
issued, to determine whether they contained provisions or clauses that
direct contractors to safeguard sensitive information consistent with
key attributes we identified for safeguarding sensitive information.
In conducting this content analysis, two GAO analysts independently
reviewed the provisions in each contract or task order and then
reconciled any differences in how they were coded. We determined
whether the contract provisions addressed limiting disclosure of
sensitive information and preventing its misuse. We also assessed the
scope of information protected--whether these protections applied to
certain categories or to all relevant types of sensitive information
that may potentially have been accessed during contract performance.
We also determined whether the contract actions required the use of
contractor nondisclosure agreements.
To obtain an in-depth understanding of the reasons why certain
contract clauses and provisions to safeguard sensitive information
were required and obtain views on their effectiveness and how
contractor compliance with the requirements was being monitored by the
government at a cross section of DOD, DHS, and HHS offices, we
selected 9 of the 42 contract actions as case studies. For each case
study, we conducted semistructured interviews with the DOD, DHS, or
HHS officials responsible for developing contract requirements and
monitoring contractor performance, including contracting officers,
contracting officers' representatives, and program managers.
To assess the adequacy of governmentwide guidance in the FAR on how
agencies are to contractually safeguard sensitive information to which
contractor employees have access, we analyzed FAR requirements that
prescribe protections associated with sensitive information, including
Part 4 (Administrative Matters); Part 7 (Acquisition Planning);
Subpart 9.5 (Organizational and Consultant Conflicts of Interest);
Part 24 (Protection of Privacy and Freedom of Information); and Part
52 (Solicitation Provisions and Contract Clauses). We reviewed pending
amendments to the FAR and legislation to determine the safeguards they
might add to existing FAR guidance. To further understand steps being
taken to amend the FAR, we interviewed government officials supporting
members of the FAR Council, which oversees the development and
maintenance of the FAR, and officials with the Office of Federal
Procurement Policy (OFPP) in the Office of Management and Budget. The
OFPP Administrator serves as chair of the FAR Council.
We conducted this performance audit from May 2009 through September
2010 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing
standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit
to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable
basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives.
We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for
our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives.
[End of section]
Appendix II: Sensitive But Unclassified Markings Identified by
President's Task Force on Controlled Unclassified Information:
In 2006 we reported on a survey of federal agencies that showed 26
were using 56 different designations to protect information they deem
critical to their missions--such as law-enforcement sensitive,
sensitive security information, and unclassified controlled nuclear
information.[Footnote 42] Because of the many different and sometimes
confusing and contradictory ways that agencies identify and protect
sensitive but unclassified (SBU) information, the sharing of
information about possible threats to homeland security has been
difficult.[Footnote 43]
To address this challenge, efforts are underway to establish new
governmentwide processes for designating, marking, safeguarding, and
disseminating SBU information. Since 2008, in response to a
presidential memorandum that replaced SBU information with "controlled
unclassified information" (CUI) as the single categorical designation
for SBU information, the executive branch is attempting to overhaul
its CUI framework.[Footnote 44] The ongoing effort is also addressing
a 2009 presidential task force report that found too many labels for
sensitive information and recommended that agencies reduce them and
balance the need for nondisclosure (to protect privacy or other
legitimate interests) and transparency and openness in government.
[Footnote 45]
The task force found that currently, across the executive branch, this
information is identified by over 100 unique markings and at least 130
different labeling or handling regimes (a partial listing of SBU
markings the task force found currently in use are shown below). The
SBU challenge, according to the task force, is that although SBU
regimes or markings are typically derived from an identifiable
authority, collectively they reflect a disjointed, inconsistent, and
unpredictable system for protecting, sharing, and disclosing sensitive
information.
Table 7: Selected SBU Markings Currently in Use:
Acquisition Sensitive:
Agency Internal Use Only (U//AIUO):
Attorney Client:
Attorney/Client Privileged:
Attorney Work Product:
Bank Secrecy Act Information (BSA):
Budgetary Information:
CALEA Cost Recovery Information (CALEA):
CFIUS Information (CFIUS):
Chemical-Terrorism Vulnerability Information (CVI):
Child Victim/Witness (CH):
Close Hold:
Commercial Markings:
Communication/Attorney Work Product (PRV):
Computer Security Act Sensitive Information (CSASI):
Confidential Business Information (CBI):
Confidential Contract Proposal Information (CCPI):
Confidential Information Protection and Statistical Efficiency Act of
2002 (CIPSEA):
Contractor Access Restricted Information (CARI):
Contractual Sensitive Information:
Controlled Nuclear Information (U//DCNI or U//ECNI):
Copyright (Date) (Owner):
Covered by Confidentiality Agreement:
DEA Sensitive (DEA S):
Deliberate Process Privilege:
Dissemination Is Prohibited Except As Authorized by AR 20-1:
Do Not Disseminate:
DOD Unclassified Controlled Nuclear Information (DOD UCNI):
Enforcement Confidential Information (ECI):
Exclusive Distribution (EXDIS or XD):
Export Controlled Information (Or Material) (ECI):
Eyes Only:
Federal Taxpayer Information:
Financial Records (NON-NSL) (FR):
Financial Records NSL (NSLF):
For Internal Use Only:
For Official Use Only (FOUO):
For Official Use Only-Law Enforcement Sensitive (FOUO-LES):
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA):
Grand Jury Material (FGJ):
Government Purpose Rights:
Health Related Information (EM):
Innocent Images Visual Information (IIVI):
Innovation Research Information and Small Business:
IT Security Related:
Juvenile-Protect Identity in Accordance With 18 USC 5031 (JI):
LAN Backup Sensitive Information:
LAN Infrastructure:
Law Enforcement Sensitive (LES):
Limited Access:
Limited Credit Information NSL (NSLC):
Limited Distribution (LIMDIS):
Limited Official Use (LOU):
Limited Official Use Information (LOUI):
Limited Official Use-Law Enforcement Sensitive (LOU-LES):
Limited Rights:
Limited Use Only (LUO:
Medical Records:
Naval Nuclear Propulsion Information (NOFORN):
Naval Nuclear Propulsion Information (U-NNPI):
No Distribution (NODIS or ND):
Not For Distribution Safeguards Information (SGI):
Official Use Only (OUO):
Official Use Only-Applied Technology:
Official Use Only-Export Controlled Information:
Official Use Only-Patent Caution Information:
Official Use Only-Protected Cooperative Census Confidential:
Official Use Only-Sensitive Internal Information:
Official Use Only-Small Business:
Operations Security Protected Information (OSPI):
Originator Controlled (ORCON):
Personally Identifiable Information-Privacy Act of 1974:
Personnel Data, Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552A):
Predecisional Product:
Pre-decisional:
Pre-Existing Markings:
Privacy Act Protected Information (PAPI):
Privileged FBI Attorney Client:
Proprietary Information (PROPIN):
Protected Critical Infrastructure Information (PCII):
RELIDO:
Research and Development Agreement Information:
Restricted Access:
Restricted By Court Order (CO):
Restricted Rights:
RSEN:
SBU-GSA-BI:
SBU-NF:
SBU/NOFORN:
Select Agent Sensitive Information (SASI):
Sensitive (SENS):
Sensitive But Unclassified (SBU):
Sensitive Drinking Water Related Information (SDWRI):
Sensitive Homeland Security Information (SHSI):
Sensitive Information (SINFO):
Sensitive Information-Special Handling Required:
Sensitive Security Information (SSI):
Sensitive Student Records (STR):
Sensitive Treaty/MOU/NDA Information (STM):
Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information (SUNSI):
Sensitive Water Vulnerability Assessment Information:
Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) Program:
Special License Rights:
Source Selection Information:
Source Selection Sensitive:
Substance Abuse Records (SAB):
Technology Transfer Information:
Telephone or Electronic Communications NSL (NSLT):
Title III Communications (T3):
Trade Secret:
Trade Sensitive Information:
Unlimited Rights.
Source: Presidential Task Force on Controlled Unclassified Information:
Note: Data are from the Report and Recommendations of the Presidential
Task Force on Controlled Unclassified Information (Aug. 25, 2009).
[End of table]
[End of section]
Appendix III: Agency Contract Provisions Containing Contractor
Safeguards for Sensitive Information:
Our analysis of agency Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR)
supplements for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the
Department of Defense (DOD), and the Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS) identified the following examples of contract clauses
and provisions that establish safeguards for contractor access to
sensitive information.
DHS:
The Department of Homeland Security Acquisition Regulation (HSAR)
Subpart 3004.4, Safeguarding Classified and Sensitive Information
Within Industry (48 C.F.R. 3004), states that contracting officers
shall insert the clause at HSAR 3052.204-71, shown in figure 1, or one
substantially the same, in solicitations and contracts when contractor
employees require recurring access to government facilities or access
to sensitive information. The clause shall not be used unless
contractor employees will require recurring access to government
facilities or access to sensitive information.
Figure 1: HSAR Clause 3052.204-71, Contractor Employee Access:
[Refer to PDF for image: illustration]
3052.204-71 Contractor employee access.
As prescribed in (HSAR) 48 CFR 3004.470-3(b), insert a clause
substantially the same as follows with appropriate alternates:
Contractor Employee Access:
(June 2006)
(a) Sensitive Information, as used in this Chapter, means any
information, the loss, misuse, disclosure, or unauthorized access to
or modification of which could adversely affect the national or
homeland security interest, or the conduct of Federal programs, or the
privacy to which individuals are entitled under section 552a of title
5, United States Code (the Privacy Act), but which has not been
specifically authorized under criteria established by an Executive
Order or an Act of Congress to be kept secret in the interest of
national defense, homeland security or foreign policy. This definition
includes the following categories of information:
(1) Protected Critical Infrastructure Information (PCII) as set out in
the Critical Infrastructure Information Act of 2002 (Title II,
Subtitle B, of the Homeland Security Act, Public Law 107-296, 196
Stat. 2135), as amended, the implementing regulations thereto (Title
6, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 29) as amended, the applicable
PCII Procedures Manual, as amended, and any supplementary guidance
officially communicated by an authorized official of the Department of
Homeland Security (including the PCII Program Manager or his/her
designee);
(2) Sensitive Security Information (SSI), as defined in Title 49, Code
of Federal Regulations, Part 1520, as amended, "Policies and
Procedures of Safeguarding and Control of SSI," as amended, and any
supplementary guidance officially communicated by an authorized
official of the Department of Homeland Security (including the
Assistant Secretary for the Transportation Security Administration or
his/her designee);
(3) Information designated as "For Official Use Only," which is
unclassified information of a sensitive nature and the unauthorized
disclosure of which could adversely impact a person's privacy or
welfare, the conduct of Federal programs, or other programs or
operations essential to the national or homeland security interest;
and;
(4) Any information that is designated "sensitive" or subject to other
controls, safeguards or protections in accordance with subsequently
adopted homeland security information handling procedures.
(b) "Information Technology Resources" include, but are not limited
to, computer equipment, networking equipment, telecommunications
equipment, cabling, network drives, computer drives, network software,
computer software, software programs, intranet sites, and internet
sites.
(c) Contractor employees working on this contract must complete such
forms as may be necessary for security or other reasons, including the
conduct of background investigations to determine suitability.
Completed forms shall be submitted as directed by the Contracting
Officer. Upon the Contracting Officer's request, the Contractor's
employees shall be fingerprinted, or subject to other investigations
as required. All contractor employees requiring recurring access to
Government facilities or access to sensitive information or IT
resources are required to have a favorably adjudicated background
investigation prior to commencing work on this contract unless this
requirement is waived under Departmental procedures.
(d) The Contracting Officer may require the contractor to prohibit
individuals from working on the contract if the government deems their
initial or continued employment contrary to the public interest for
any reason, including, but not limited to, carelessness,
insubordination, incompetence, or security concerns.
(e) Work under this contract may involve access to sensitive
information. Therefore, the Contractor shall not disclose, orally or
in writing, any sensitive information to any person unless authorized
in writing by the Contracting Officer. For those contractor employees
authorized access to sensitive information, the contractor shall
ensure that these persons receive training concerning the protection
and disclosure of sensitive information both during and after contract
performance.
(f) The Contractor shall include the substance of this clause in all
subcontracts at any tier where the subcontractor may have access to
Government facilities, sensitive information, or resources.
(End of clause)
Alternate I:
(June 2006):
When the contract will require contractor employees to have access to
Information Technology (IT) resources, add the following paragraphs:
(g) Before receiving access to TT resources under this contract the
individual must receive a security briefing, which the Contracting
Officer's Technical Representative (COTR) will arrange, and complete
any nondisclosure agreement furnished by DHS.
(h) The contractor shall have access only to those areas of DHS
information technology resources explicitly stated in this contract or
approved by the COTR in writing as necessary for performance of the
work under this contract. Any attempts by contractor personnel to gain
access to any information technology resources not expressly
authorized by the statement of work, other terms and conditions in
this contract, or as approved in writing by the COTR, is strictly
prohibited. In the event of violation of this provision, DHS will take
appropriate actions with regard to the contract and the individual(s)
involved.
(i) Contractor access to DHS networks from a remote location is a
temporary privilege for mutual convenience while the contractor
performs business for the DHS Component. It is not a right, a
guarantee of access, a condition of the contract, or Government
Furnished Equipment (GFE).
(j) Contractor access will be terminated for unauthorized use. The
contractor agrees to hold and save DHS harmless from any unauthorized
use and agrees not to request additional time or money under the
contract for any delays resulting from unauthorized use or access.
(k) Non-U.S. citizens shall not be authorized to access or assist in
the development, operation, management or maintenance of Department IT
systems under the contract, unless a waiver has been granted by the
Head of the Component or designee, with the concurrence of both the
Department's Chief Security Officer (CSO) and the Chief Information
Officer (CIO) or their designees. Within DHS Headquarters, the waiver
may be granted only with the approval of both the CSO and the CIO or
their designees. In order for a waiver to be granted:
(1) The individual must be a legal permanent resident of the U. S. or
a citizen of Ireland, Israel, the Republic of the Philippines, or any
nation on the Allied Nations List maintained by the Department of
State;
(2) There must be a compelling reason for using this individual as
opposed to a U. S. citizen; and;
(3) The waiver must be in the best interest of the Government.
(l) Contractors shall identify in their proposals the names and
citizenship of all non-U.S. citizens proposed to work under the
contract. Any additions or deletions of non-U.S. citizens after
contract award shall also be reported to the contracting officer.
(End of clause)
Alternate II:
(June 2006):
When the Department has determined contract employee access to
sensitive information or Government facilities must be limited to U.S.
citizens and lawful permanent residents, but the contract will not
require access to IT resources, add the following paragraphs:
(g) Each individual employed under the contract shall be a citizen of
the United States of America, or an alien who has been lawfully
admitted for permanent residence as evidenced by a Permanent Resident
Card (USCIS I-551). Any exceptions must be approved by the
Department's Chief Security Officer or designee.
(h) Contractors shall identify in their proposals, the names and
citizenship of all non-U.S. citizens proposed to work under the
contract. Any additions or deletions of non-U.S. citizens after
contract award shall also be reported to the contracting officer.
(End of clause)
Source: DHS.
[End of figure]
DOD:
The Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) Subpart
204.4, Safeguarding Classified Information Within Industry (48 C.F.R.
204.4), states DFARS clause 252.204-7000, Disclosure of Information
(shown in figure 2), should be used in solicitations and contracts
when the contractor will have access to or generate unclassified
information that may be sensitive and inappropriate to release to the
public.
Figure 2: DFARS Clause 252.204-7000, Disclosure of Information:
[Refer to PDF for image: illustration]
252.204-7000 Disclosure of Information.
As prescribed in 204.404-70(a), use the following clause:
Disclosure Of Information (Dec 1991):
(a) The Contractor shall not release to anyone outside the
Contractor's organization any unclassified information, regardless of
medium (e.g., film, tape, document), pertaining to any part of this
contract or any program related to this contract, unless:
(1) The Contracting Officer has given prior written approval; or;
(2) The information is otherwise in the public domain before the date
of release.
(b) Requests for approval shall identify the specific information to
be released, the medium to be used, and the purpose for the release.
The Contractor shall submit its request to the Contracting Officer at
least 45 days before the proposed date for release.
(c) The Contractor agrees to include a similar requirement in each
subcontract under this contract. Subcontractors shall submit requests
for authorization to release through the prime contractor to the
Contracting Officer.
(End of clause)
Source: DOD.
[End of figure]
HHS:
Guidance and contract provisions available in the Department of Health
and Human Services Acquisition Regulation (BHSAR) Subpart 324.70,
Confidentiality of Information (48 C.F.R. 324.70) (2006), and the
accompanying contract clause, shown in figure 3, were deleted when HHS
revised the BHSAR, effective January 2010.[Footnote 56] The previous
subpart stated that it was HHS policy to protect the personal interest
of individuals, corporate interests of nongovernment organizations,
and the capacity of the government to provide public services when
information about those interests is obtained by contractors in
performance of HHS contracts. The subpart further stated that this
protection depended on the contractor's recognition and proper
handling of the information.
The "Confidentiality of Information" contract clause shown in figure 3
was to be used in solicitations and resultant contracts whenever the
need existed to keep information confidential, for example in
contracts that involve the use of proprietary plans or processes or
confidential financial information of organizations other than the
contractors. In addition, any solicitation or contract including this
clause was to indicate, as specifically as possible, the types of data
that would be covered and the requirements for handling the data.
Figure 3: HHSAR 352.224.70, Confidentiality if Information:
[REfer to PDF for image: illustration]
352.224-70 Confidentiality of information.
The following clause covers the policy set forth in subpart 324.70 and
is used in accordance with the instructions set forth in 324.7004.
Confidentiality Of Information (Jan 2006):
(a) Confidential information, as used in this clause, means
information or data of a personal nature about an individual, or
proprietary information or data submitted by or pertaining to an
institution or organization.
(b) The Contracting Officer and the Contractor may, by mutual consent,
identify elsewhere in this contract specific information and/or
categories of information which the Government will furnish to the
Contractor or that the Contractor is expected to generate which is
confidential. Similarly, the Contracting Officer and the Contractor
may, by mutual consent, identify such confidential information from
time to time during the performance of the contract. Failure to agree
will be settled pursuant to the "Disputes" clause.
(c) If it is established elsewhere in this contract that information
to be utilized under this contract, or a portion thereof, is subject
to the Privacy Act, the Contractor will follow the rules and
procedures of disclosure set forth in the Privacy Act of 1974, 5
U.S.C. 552a, and implementing regulations and policies, with respect
to systems of records determined to be subject to the Privacy Act.
(d) Confidential information, as defined in paragraph (a) of this
clause, shall not be disclosed without the prior written consent of
the individual, institution, or organization.
(e) Whenever the Contractor is uncertain with regard to the proper
handling of material under the contract, or if the material in
question is subject to the Privacy Act or is confidential information
subject to the provisions of this clause, the Contractor should obtain
a written determination from the Contracting Officer prior to any
release, disclosure, dissemination, or publication.
(f) Contracting Officer determinations will reflect the result of
internal coordination with appropriate program and legal officials.
(g) The provisions of paragraph (d) of this clause shall not apply to
conflicting or overlapping provisions in other Federal, State, or
local laws.
(End of clause)
Source: HHS.
Note: Effective January 2010, HHS has removed this clause from the
HHSAR.
[End of figure]
Appendix IV: Contractor Employee Nondisclosure Agreements Used by
Agencies:
[End of section]
Our review of the Department of Defense (DOD) and the Department of
Homeland Security (DHS) contract clauses and provisions to protect
sensitive information identified examples of standard nondisclosure
agreement forms in use by these agencies consistent with internal
control standards that call for restrictions on access to and
accountability for resources and records.
Air Force Source Selection Non-disclosure Agreement:
The Air Force Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (AFFARS)
section on procurement integrity states that any individuals requiring
access to source-selection information as a result of participating on
a source selection or to perform their duties shall sign a Source
Selection Non-disclosure Agreement identified in the Air Force
mandatory procedure for source selection, and shown in figure 4.
[Footnote 47] The Source Selection Non-disclosure Agreement may be
used on an annual basis for individuals who must have access to source-
selection information in the performance of their official duties
throughout the year, whether or not they participate as part of the
actual source-selection team.
Figure 4: Source Selection Non-disclosure Agreement Used by the Air
Force:
[Refer to PDF for image: illustration]
Source Selection Non-Disclosure Agreement:
Name:
Grade:
Job Title:
Organization:
Source Selection: (or title of position, if used as an Annual
Certificate IAW AFFARS 5303.104-4.)
Date:
Briefing Acknowledgment:
1. I acknowledge I have been assigned to the source selection (or
position) indicated above. I am aware that unauthorized disclosure of
source selection or proprietary information could damage the integrity
of this procurement and that the transmission or revelation of such
information to unauthorized persons could subject me to prosecution
under the Procurement Integrity Laws or under other applicable laws.
2. I do solemnly swear or affirm that I will not divulge, publish, or
reveal by word, conduct, or any other means, such information or
knowledge, except as necessary to do so in the performance of my
official duties related to this source selection and in accordance
with the laws of the United States, unless specifically authorized in
writing in each and every case by a duly authorized representative of
the United States Government. I take this obligation freely, without
any mental reservation or purpose of evasion and in the absence of
duress.
3. I acknowledge that the information I receive will be given only to
persons specifically granted access to the source selection
information and may not be further divulged without specific prior
written approval from an authorized individual.
4. If, at any time during the source selection process, my
participation might result in a real, apparent, possible, or potential
conflict of interest, I will immediately report the circumstances to
the Source Selection Authority.
5. All personnel are requested to check the applicable block:
I have submitted a current OGE Form 450 Executive Branch Confidential
Financial Disclosure Report, as required by DODD 5500.07 Standards of
Conduct.
I am not required to submit an OGE Form 450.
I have submitted a current SF278 Executive Branch Confidential
Financial Disclosure Report, as required by DODD 5500.07 Standards of
Conduct.
I am not required to submit a Form SF278.
Or:
I am a non-government employee. I have signed a proprietary
information non-disclosure agreement that has been included in the
contract between my firm and the government that precludes me from
divulging any proprietary data to which I may gain access during the
evaluation of proposals.
Neither I, nor anyone in my immediate family, have any financial
interest in any company involved in this acquisition as either a prime
contractor or as a subcontractor.
Signature:
Date:
Debriefing Certificate:
I have been debriefed orally by________________ as to my obligation to
protect all information to which I have had access during this source
selection. I no longer have any material pertinent to this source
selection in my possession except material that I have been authorized
in writing to retain by the SSA. I will not discuss, communicate,
transmit, or release any information orally, in writing, or by any
other means to anyone after this date unless specifically authorized
to do so by a duly authorized representative of the United States
Government.
Signature:
Date:
Source: Air Force.
[End of figure]
TRICARE Management Activity Confidentiality Agreement (Non-Federal
Employee) and Non-disclosure Agreement for Contractor Employees and
Subcontractors:
Contractor conflict-of-interest-related procedures under the
Department of Defense (DOD) TRICARE Management Activity's guidance on
preparing nonpurchased care acquisition packages include the
application of standard nondisclosure and confidentiality agreements
with contractor employees. This guidance states that when evaluating
contractor proposals, any contractor employees providing
administrative support into the source selection process are required
to review, sign, and adhere to a standard confidentiality agreement,
shown in figure 5, which outlines their responsibilities.
[Refer to PDF for image]
[End of figure]
Figure 5: Confidentiality Agreement Used by DOD's TRICARE Management
Activity for Contractor Employees Providing Administrative Support
into the Source-Selection Process:
[Refer to PDF for image: illustration]
Confidentiality Agreement (Non-Federal Employee)[Footnote 1]:
As a non-federal employee with access to information to be used in the
evaluation of proposals for (short title of TMA requirement):
(hereafter referred to as "proposals") under Solicitation Number:
issued by the Contracting Office, I acknowledge that my conduct is
governed by the Procurement Integrity Regulations found at 48 CFR or
FAR Part 3.104. I also recognize that the Contractor Bid or Proposal
Information and Source Selection Information, relative to the TMA
Procurements, may be subject to further restrictions under the Trade
Secrets Act, 18 U.S.C. 1832, 18 U.S.C.1905 and the Privacy Act, 5
U.S.C. 552a.
By executing this Confidentiality Agreement I agree not to disclose
any Contractor Bid or Proposal Information or Source Selection
Information, relative to the TMA Procurements, outside the federal
government. I further agree that I will only disclose, within the
federal government, any Contractor Bid or Proposal Information or
Source Selection Information, relative to the TMA Procurements, to
persons authorized to receive such information, in accordance with
applicable agency regulations or procedures. I also agree not to
reproduce any Contractor Bid or Proposal Information or Source
Selection Information relative to the TMA Procurements, except as
authorized by the contracting officer or his or her authorized
representative. I also agree that, if I am requested to do so by the
contracting officer, or his or her authorized representative, I will
promptly return, to the contracting officer, or to his or her
authorized representative, all Contractor Bid or Proposal Information
or Source Selection Information, relative to the TMA Procurements,
that are in my possession. I also will promptly return all copies of
those materials that are in my possession.
By executing this Confidentiality Agreement I agree that, in the
course of performing my duties in the evaluation of proposals under
the TMA Procurements, I will not use my position, or any information
contained in the Contractor Bid or Proposal Information or Source
Selection Information, relative to the TMA Procurements, to further my
own private interest, to further my business interest, or to further
the private or business interests of another person or entity, whether
through advice, recommendation or by knowing of unauthorized
disclosure of information contained in the Contractor Bid or Proposal
Information or Source Selection Information. I understand the
requirements of DoD 5500.7-R, Joint Ethics Regulation, Chapter 5,
Conflicts of Interest. To the best of my knowledge, neither I nor any
members of my immediate family have a direct or indirect interest in
any of the firms submitting a proposal for the consideration of the
evaluation panel which conflict substantially, or appear to conflict
substantially, with my duties in support thereof. I agree that, if in
the course of performing my duties in the evaluation of proposals
under the TMA Procurements, I become aware that my continued
evaluation of proposals would conflict with my own private interest,
my business interest, or the private or business interests of an
immediate family member, I will notify the contracting activity
immediately in writing and recuse myself from further evaluation of
proposals under the TMA Procurements.
Further, if I become aware of actions by any other person working with
the proposals whose personal conduct may be in violation of the
prohibitions in this paragraph or FAR Part 3.104, I will immediately
notify the TMA Office of General Counsel in writing of this
possibility.
By executing this Confidentiality Agreement I recognize that I may
also have access to trade secrets, proprietary information, technical
data, or computer software submitted by offerors under the TMA
Procurements. I agree to abide by any restrictive markings on any such
trade secrets, proprietary information, technical data, or computer
software. By executing this Confidentiality Agreement I also agree
that, if I am requested to do so by the contracting officer, I will
execute a separate Use and Non-Disclosure Agreement as prescribed
under 48 CFR 227.7103-7 (c).
A copy of the Procurement Integrity Regulations found in FAR Part
3.104 has been provided for my review. I have read this Agreement
carefully and my questions, if any, have been answered to my
satisfaction.
Printed name:
Signature:
Title:
Date:
Witness Signature:
Source: TRICARE Management Activity.
Footnote:
[1] Executed in accordance with the requirements contained under 48
CFR 15.207(b).
[End of figure]
In addition, the guidance states that contractors performing many
types of contract services are required to execute a standard
nondisclosure agreement, shown in figure 6. This includes contractors
not involved in acquisition support, when working on an order
requiring access to the data, code, or products of another contractor.
[Refer to PDF for image]
[End of figure]
Figure 6: Non-disclosure Agreement for Contractor Employees and
Subcontractors Used by DOD's TRICARE Management Activity:
[Refer to PDF for image: illustration]
Non-Disclosure Agreement For Contractor Employees And Their
Subcontractors:
I, _______ am an employee of or a subcontractor to ____________
(Company Name), a contractor acting under contract to the __________
(Name of TMA Directorate) under Prime Contract No. ____________
through Delivery Order ________________.
I understand that in the performance of this task, I may have access
to sensitive or proprietary business, technical, financial, and/or
source selection information belonging to the Government or other
contractors. Proprietary information includes, but is not limited to,
cost/pricing data, Government spend plan data, contractor technical
proposal data, independent government cost estimates, negotiation
strategies and contractor data presented in negotiations, contracting
plans, and statements of work. I agree not to discuss, divulge, or
disclose any such information or data to any person or entity except
those persons directly concerned with the performance of this delivery
order. I have been advised that the unauthorized disclosure, use or
negligent handling of the information by me could cause irreparable
injury to the owner of the information. The injury could be source
sensitive procurement information of the government or
proprietary/trade secret information of another company.
As used in this agreement, sensitive information is an overarching
term that includes, but is not limited to, sensitive but unclassified
(SBU) information/data, Protected Health Information (PHI), For
Official Use Only (FOUO), and Privacy Information (PI). This includes
information in routine DoD payroll, finance, logistics, inventory, and
personnel management systems. The loss of, misuse of, or unauthorized
access to or modification of this information could adversely affect
the national interest or the conduct of Federal programs, or the
privacy to which individuals are entitled under Section 552a of Title
5, as amended, but which has not been specifically authorized under
criteria established by an Executive Order or an Act of Congress to be
kept secret in the interest of national defense or foreign policy.
I attest that I am familiar with, and I will comply with the standards
for access, dissemination, handling, and safeguarding of the
information to which I am granted access as cited in the Agreement and
in accordance with the guidance provided to me relative to the
specific category of information.
I understand that the United States Government may seek any remedy
available to it to enforce this Agreement, including, but not limited
to, application for a court order prohibiting disclosure of
information in breach of this agreement. Court costs and reasonable
attorney fees incurred by the United States Government may be assessed
against me if I lose such action. I understand that another company
might file a separate claim against me if I have misused its
proprietary information.
Proprietary information/data will be handled in accordance with
Government regulations. This agreement shall continue for a term of
three (3) years from the date upon which I last have access to the
information there from.
Sensitive information/data will be handled in accordance with
Government regulations. The Statute of Limitation is indefinite for
the unauthorized release of sensitive information.
In the event that I seek other employment, I will reveal to any
prospective employer the continuing obligation in this agreement prior
to accepting any employment offer.
The obligations imposed herein do not extend to information/data which:
a) is in the public domain at the time of receipt, or it came into the
public domain thereafter through no act of mine;
b) is disclosed with the prior written approval of the TMA designated
Contracting Officer;
c) is demonstrated to have been developed by __________(Company Name),
or me independently of disclosures made hereunder;
d) is disclosed pursuant to court order, after notification to the TMA
designated Contracting Officer;
e) is disclosed inadvertently despite the exercise of the same
reasonable degree of care a party normally uses to protect its own
proprietary information.
I have read this agreement carefully and my questions, if any, have
been answered to my satisfaction.
(Printed Name of Employee or Subcontractor):
Date:
(Signature of Employee or Subcontractor):
Organization:
(Witness Signature):
Date:
Source: TRICARE Management Activity.
[End of figure]
DHS Non-disclosure Agreement:
The DHS FAR supplement subpart relating to safeguarding classified and
sensitive information within industry requires compliance with the
policies and procedures in the agency management directive, which
addresses safeguarding sensitive information originated within DHS in
all contracts that involve contractor access to facilities,
information technology resources, or sensitive information.[Footnote
48] Taken together, DHS's FAR supplement and security management
directive require contractors and consultants with access to sensitive
information to execute the DHS Form 11000-6, Sensitive But
Unclassified Information Non-disclosure Agreement, shown in figure 7.
According to the DHS security management directive, individual
contractor employee execution of this nondisclosure agreement is a
condition of access to such information. Additionally, to safeguard
procurement integrity and personal conduct, DHS guidance states that
government contractors who provide technical or other support services
with respect to DHS source selections must complete this nondisclosure
agreement.
Figure 7: DHS Form 11000-6, Sensitive But Unclassified Information Non-
disclosure Agreement DHS Requires from Contractors and Consultants:
[Refer to PDF for image: illustration]
Department Of Homeland Security:
Non-Disclosure Agreement:
I,__________, an individual official, employee, consultant, or
subcontractor of or to___________ (the Authorized Entity), intending
to be legally bound, hereby consent to the terms in this Agreement in
consideration of my being granted conditional access to certain
information, specified below, that is owned by, produced by, or in the
possession of the United States Government.
(Signer will acknowledge the category or categories of information
that he or she may have access to, and the signers willingness to
comply with the standards for protection by placing his or her
initials in front of the applicable category or categories.)
Initials:
Protected Critical Infrastructure Information (PCII):
I attest that I am familiar with, and I will comply with all
requirements of the PCII program set out in the Critical
Infrastructure Information Act of 2002 (CII Act) (Title II, Subtitle
B, of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, Public Law 107-296, 196 Stat.
2135, 6 USC 101 et seq.), as amended, the implementing regulations
thereto (6 CFR Part 29), as amended, and the applicable PCII
Procedures Manual, as amended, and with any such requirements that may
be officially communicated to me by the PCII Program Manager or the
PCII Program Managers designee.
Initials:
Sensitive Security Information (SSI):
I attest that I am familiar with, and I will comply with the standards
for access, dissemination, handling, and safeguarding of SSI
information as cited in this Agreement and in accordance with 49 CFR
Part 1520, "Protection of Sensitive Security Information," "Policies
and Procedures for Safeguarding and Control of SSI," as amended, and
any supplementary guidance issued by an authorized official of the
Department of Homeland Security.
Initials:
Other Sensitive but Unclassified (SBU):
As used in this Agreement, sensitive but unclassified information is
an over-arching term that covers any information, not otherwise
indicated above, which the loss of, misuse of, or unauthorized access
to or modification of could adversely affect the national interest or
the conduct of Federal programs, or the privacy to which individuals
are entitled under Section 552a of Title 5, as amended, but which has
not been specifically authorized under criteria established by an
Executive Order or an Act of Congress to be kept secret in the
interest of national defense or foreign policy. This includes
information categorized by DHS or other government agencies as: For
Official Use Only (FOUO); Official Use Only (0U0); Sensitive Homeland
Security Information (SHSI); Limited Official Use (LOU); Law
Enforcement Sensitive (LES); Safeguarding Information (SGI);
Unclassified Controlled Nuclear Information (UCNI); and any other
identifier used by other government agencies to categorize information
as sensitive but unclassified.
I attest that I am familiar with, and I will comply with the standards
for access, dissemination, handling, and safeguarding of the
information to which I am granted access as cited in this Agreement
and in accordance with the guidance provided to me relative to the
specific category of information.
I understand and agree to the following terms and conditions of my
access to the information indicated above:
1. I hereby acknowledge that I have received a security indoctrination
concerning the nature and protection of information to which I have
been provided conditional access, including the procedures to be
followed in ascertaining whether other persons to whom I contemplate
disclosing this information have been approved for access to it, and
that I understand these procedures.
2. By being granted conditional access to the information indicated
above, the United States Government has placed special confidence and
trust in me and I am obligated to protect this information from
unauthorized disclosure, in accordance with the terms of this
Agreement and the laws, regulations, and directives applicable to the
specific categories of information to which I am granted access.
3. I attest that I understand my responsibilities and that I am
familiar with and will comply with the standards for protecting such
information that I may have access to in accordance with the terms of
this Agreement and the laws, regulations, and/or directives applicable
to the specific categories of information to which I am granted
access. I understand that the United States Government may conduct
inspections, at any time or place, for the purpose of ensuring
compliance with the conditions for access, dissemination, handling and
safeguarding information under this Agreement.
4. I will not disclose or release any information provided to me
pursuant to this Agreement without proper authority or authorization.
Should situations arise that warrant the disclosure or release of such
information I will do so only under approved circumstances and in
accordance with the laws, regulations, or directives applicable to the
specific categories of information. I will honor and comply with any
and all dissemination restrictions cited or verbally relayed to me by
the proper authority.
5. (a) For PCII - (1) Upon the completion of my engagement as an
employee, consultant, or subcontractor under the contract, or the
completion of my work on the PCII Program, whichever occurs first, I
will surrender promptly to the PCII Program Manager or his designee,
or to the appropriate PCII officer, PCII of any type whatsoever that
is in my possession.
(2) If the Authorized Entity is a United States Government contractor
performing services in support of the PCII Program, I will not
request, obtain, maintain, or use PCII unless the PCII Program Manager
or Program Manager's designee has first made in writing, with respect
to the contractor, the certification as provided for in Section
29.8(c) of the implementing regulations to the CII Act, as amended.
(b) For SSI and SBU - I hereby agree that material which I have in my
possession and containing information covered by this Agreement, will
be handled and safeguarded in a manner that affords sufficient
protection to prevent the unauthorized disclosure of or inadvertent
access to such information, consistent with the laws, regulations, or
directives applicable to the specific categories of information. I
agree that I shall return all information to which I have had access
or which is in my possession 1) upon demand by an authorized
individual; and/or 2) upon the conclusion of my duties, association,
or support to DHS; and/or 3) upon the determination that my official
duties do not require further access to such information.
6. I hereby agree that I will not alter or remove markings, which
indicate a category of information or require specific handling
instructions, from any material I may come in contact with, in the
case of SSI or SBU, unless such alteration or removal is consistent
with the requirements set forth in the laws, regulations, or
directives applicable to the specific category of information or, in
the case of PCII, unless such alteration or removal is authorized by
the PCII Program Manager or the PCII Program Manager's designee. I
agree that if I use information from a sensitive document or other
medium, I will carry forward any markings or other required
restrictions to derivative products, and will protect them in the same
matter as the original.
7. I hereby agree that I shall promptly report to the appropriate
official, in accordance with the guidance issued for the applicable
category of information, any loss, theft, misuse, misplacement,
unauthorized disclosure, or other security violation, I have knowledge
of and whether or not I am personally involved. I also understand that
my anonymity will be kept to the extent possible when reporting
security violations.
8. If I violate the terms and conditions of this Agreement, such
violation may result in the cancellation of my conditional access to
the information covered by this Agreement. This may serve as a basis
for denying me conditional access to other types of information, to
include classified national security information.
9. (a) With respect to SSI and SBU, I hereby assign to the United
States Government all royalties, remunerations, and emoluments that
have resulted, will result, or may result from any disclosure,
publication, or revelation of the information not consistent with the
terms of this Agreement.
(b) With respect to PCII I hereby assign to the entity owning the PCII
and the United States Government, all royalties, remunerations, and
emoluments that have resulted, will result, or may result from any
disclosure, publication, or revelation of PCII not consistent with the
terms of this Agreement.
10. This Agreement is made and intended for the benefit of the United
States Government and may be enforced by the United States Government
or the Authorized Entity. By granting me conditional access to
information in this context, the United States Government and, with
respect to PCII, the Authorized Entity, may seek any remedy available
to it to enforce this Agreement including, but not limited to,
application for a court order prohibiting disclosure of information in
breach of this Agreement. I understand that if I violate the terms and
conditions of this Agreement, I could be subjected to administrative,
disciplinary, civil, or criminal action, as appropriate, under the
laws, regulations, or directives applicable to the category of
information involved and neither the United States Government nor the
Authorized Entity have waived any statutory or common law evidentiary
privileges or protections that they may assert in any administrative
or court proceeding to protect any sensitive information to which I
have been given conditional access under the terms of this Agreement.
11. Unless and until I am released in writing by an authorized
representative of the Department of Homeland Security (if permissible
for the particular category of information), I understand that all
conditions and obligations imposed upon me by this Agreement apply
during the time that I am granted conditional access, and at all times
thereafter.
12. Each provision of this Agreement is severable. If a court should
find any provision of this Agreement to be unenforceable, all other
provisions shall remain in full force and effect.
13. My execution of this Agreement shall not nullify or affect in any
manner any other secrecy or non-disclosure Agreement which I have
executed or may execute with the United States Government or any of
its departments or agencies.
14. These restrictions are consistent with and do not supersede,
conflict with, or otherwise alter the employee obligations, rights, or
liabilities created by Executive Order No. 12958, as amended; Section
7211 of Title 5, United States Code (governing disclosures to
Congress); Section 1034 of Title 10, United States Code, as amended by
the Military Whistleblower Protection Act (governing disclosure to
Congress by members of the military); Section 2302(b)(8) of Title 5,
United States Code, as amended by the Whistleblower Protection Act
(governing disclosures of illegality, waste, fraud, abuse or public
health or safety threats): the Intelligence Identities Protection Act
of 1982 (50 USC 421 et seq.) (governing disclosures that could expose
confidential Government agents); and the statutes which protect
against disclosure that may compromise the national security,
including Sections 641, 793, 794, 798, and 952 of Title 18, United
States Code, and Section 4(b) of the Subversive Activities Act of 1950
(50 USC 783(b)). The definitions, requirements, obligations, rights,
sanctions, and liabilities created by said Executive Order and listed
statutes are incorporated into this agreement and are controlling.
15. Signing this Agreement does not bar disclosures to Congress or to
an authorized official of an executive agency or the Department of
Justice that am essential to reporting a substantial violation of law.
16. I represent and warrant that I have the authority to enter into
this Agreement.
17. I have read this Agreement carefully and my questions, if any,
have been answered. I acknowledge that the briefing officer has made
available to me any laws, regulations, or directives referenced in
this document so that I may read them at this time, if I so choose.
Department Of Homeland Security:
Non-Disclosure Agreement:
Acknowledgment:
Typed/Printed Name:
Government/Department/Agency/Business Address:
Telephone Number:
I make this Agreement in good faith, without mental reservation or
purpose of evasion.
Signature:
Date:
Witness:
Typed/Printed Name:
Government/Department/Agency/Business Address:
Telephone Number:
Signature:
Date:
This form is not subject to the requirements of P.L. 104-13,
"Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995" 44 USC, Chapter 35.
Source: DHS.
[End of figure]
The Department of the Treasury's (Treasury) reliance on private-sector
resources to assist with implementing the Troubled Asset Relief
Program (TARP) since its 2008 beginning underscores the importance of
addressing conflict-of-interest issues. As we have previously
reported, Treasury has strengthened its processes for managing and
monitoring conflicts of interest among contractors and financial
agents.[Footnote 49] In January 2009, Treasury issued an interim
regulation on TARP conflicts of interest, which was effective
immediately.[Footnote 50] Among other provisions, the regulation
requires a certification, in the form of a nondisclosure agreement,
from each retained entity's management official and key individuals
performing work under a contract or financial agency agreement stating
that he or she will comply with the requirements for confidentiality
of nonpublic information before performing work and annually
thereafter. An example of a nondisclosure agreement Treasury uses with
its TARP contractors is shown in figure 8.
Figure 8: Non-disclosure Agreement Used by the Department of the
Treasury for TARP Contractor Employees and Management Officials:
[Refer to PDF for image: illustration]
Non-Disclosure Agreement:
Conditional Access to Nonpublic Information:
I, __________________employee of ______________ (Organization)
hereby consent to the terms in this Agreement in consideration of my
being granted conditional access to certain United States Government
nonpublic information.
I understand and agree to the following terms and conditions:
1. By being granted conditional access to nonpublic information, the
_____________(Organization) and the U.S. Department of the Treasury
(Treasury) have placed special confidence and trust in me, and I am
obligated to protect this information from unauthorized disclosure,
according to the terms of this Agreement.
2. Nonpublic information refers to any information provided to me by
the Treasury or __________________(Organization) in connection with my
authorized services to the Treasury, or that I obtain or develop in
providing authorized services to the Treasury, other than information
designated as publicly available by the Treasury in writing or that
becomes publicly available from a source other than the Financial
Agent. Nonpublic information includes but is not limited to
information about the Treasury's business, economic, and policy plans,
financial information, trade secrets, information subject to the
Privacy Act, personally identifiable information (PII) , and sensitive
but unclassified (SBU) information.
3. PII includes, but is not limited to, information pertaining to an
individual's education, bank accounts, financial transactions, medical
history, and criminal or employment history and other information
which can be used to distinguish or trace an individual's identity,
such as their name, social security number, date and place of birth,
mother's maiden name, biometric records, etc., including any other
personal information which is linked or linkable to an individual.
This definition includes information that the loss, misuse, or
unauthorized access to or modification of could adversely affect the
privacy that individuals are entitled to under the Privacy Act.
4. SBU information is any information where the loss, misuse, or
unauthorized access to or modification of could adversely affect the
national interest or the conduct of Federal programs. This definition
includes trade secret or other information protected under the Trade
Secrets Act, and may include other information designated by the
Treasury or as defined by other Federal Government sources.
5. I am being granted conditional access to nonpublic information,
contingent upon my execution of this Agreement, to provide authorized
services to the Treasury.
6. Except as set forth in paragraph 14 below, 1 shall never divulge
any nonpublic information provided to me pursuant to this Agreement to
anyone, unless I have been advised in writing by the ____________
(Organization) and/or the Treasury that an individual is authorized to
receive it.
7. I will submit to the Treasury for security review, prior to any
submission for publication, any book, article, column or other written
work for general publication that is based upon any knowledge I obtain
during the course of my work in connection with the Treasury. I hereby
assign to the Federal Government all rights, royalties, remunerations
and emoluments that have resulted or will result or may result from
any disclosure, publication, or revelation of nonpublic information
not consistent with the terms of this Agreement.
8. If I violate the terms and conditions of this Agreement, I
understand that the unauthorized disclosure of nonpublic information
could compromise the security of individuals, the _______________
(Organization) and the Treasury.
9. If I violate the terms and conditions of this Agreement, such
violation may result in the cancellation of my conditional access to
nonpublic information. Further, violation of the terms and conditions
of this Agreement may result in the_______________(Organization) and/or
the United States taking administrative, civil or any other
appropriate relief.
10. I understand that the willful disclosure of information to which I
have agreed herein not to divulge may also constitute a criminal
offense.
11. Unless I am provided a written release by the Treasury from this
Agreement, or any portions of it, all conditions and obligations
contained in this Agreement apply both during my period of conditional
access, and at which time and after my affiliation and/or employment
with the _________________(Organization) ends.
12. Each provision of this Agreement is severable. If a court should
find any provision of this Agreement to be unenforceable, all other
provisions shall remain in full force and effect.
13. I understand that the Treasury may seek any remedy available to it
to enforce this Agreement, including, but not limited to, application
for a court order prohibiting disclosure of information in breach of
this Agreement.
14. I understand that if I am under U.S. Congressional or judicial
subpoena, I may be required by law to release information, and that
pursuant to 31 CFR Part 31, I shall provide prior notice to Treasury
of any such disclosure or release.
I make this Agreement in good faith, without mental reservation or
purpose of evasion.
Signature:
Date:
Source: Treasury.
[End of figure]
Figure 30: (Continued):
[Refer to PDF for image]
[End of figure]
[End of section]
Appendix V: Recent FAR Changes to Add Guidance and Contract Provisions
for Information Technology (IT) Security:
Between 2005 and 2007, contractor information-security and personnel-
security requirements in the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) were
revised to assist agencies in reducing identified risks from
contractors' access to sensitive federal facilities and information
technology (IT) systems.
Federal Information-Security Oversight of Contractor IT Operations:
Our April 2005 report concerning the federal government's extensive
reliance on contractors to provide IT systems and services found that
without appropriate policies and guidance on how to develop effective
information-security oversight of contractors, agencies may not
develop sufficient policies to address the range of risks posed by
contractors, and that as a result, federal information and operations
can be placed at undue risk.[Footnote 51] Since FAR Council efforts to
update the FAR provisions had stretched over 3 years, we recommended
expeditious completion to ensure that agencies develop appropriate
information-security oversight capabilities.
Five months later, in September 2005, an interim rule amending the FAR
was published.[Footnote 52] In implementing the IT security provisions
of the Federal Information Security Management Act of 2002 (FISMA),
the FAR Council stated that the interim rule change was necessary to
ensure the government was not exposed to inappropriate and unknown
risk. Unauthorized disclosure, theft, or denial of IT resources had
the potential to disrupt agency operations and could have financial,
legal, human safety, personal privacy, and public confidence effects,
according to the FAR Council. Adding specific FISMA-related provisions
was intended to provide clear, consistent guidance to acquisition
officials and program managers, and to encourage and strengthen
communication with IT security officials, chief information officers,
and other affected parties. Among other changes this rule amended the
FAR by:
* adding a definition for the term "Information Security" to FAR
Subpart 2.1, as shown in the text box below;
* incorporating IT security requirements in acquisition planning and
when describing agency needs; and:
* revising the policy in FAR Subpart 39.101 for IT acquisitions to
require including the appropriate agency security policy and
requirements.
FAR Subpart 2.1 Definition of Information Security Added in 2005:
Information security means protecting information and information
systems from unauthorized access, use, disclosure, disruption,
modification, or destruction in order to provide:
1. Integrity, which means guarding against improper information
modification or destruction, and includes ensuring information
nonrepudiation and authenticity;
2. Confidentiality, which means preserving authorized restrictions on
access and disclosure, including means for protecting personal privacy
and proprietary information; and;
3. Availability, which means ensuring timely and reliable access to,
and use of, information.
Source: 70 Fed. Reg. 57449-52 (Sept. 30, 2005).
Personal Identity Verification of Contractor Personnel:
In 2007 the FAR was amended to add personnel-security requirements, in
recognition that contractors increasingly are required to have
physical access to federally controlled facilities and information
systems in the performance of government contracts and the President's
issuance of Homeland Security Presidential Directive 12 (HSPD-12).
Specifically, the FAR was amended to require agencies to include a
standard clause in their solicitations and contracts when contractor
performance requires recurring access to government facilities and
systems. This clause states that the contractors shall comply with
agency personal identity verification procedures for issuance of
identification cards.[Footnote 53] This action to unify FAR guidance
has assisted agencies in implementing HSPD-12, requiring the
establishment of a governmentwide standard for secure and reliable
forms of identification cards for federal employees and contractors
alike. For example, updates issued since 2007 to some agency FAR
supplements have added agency-specific HSPD-12 policies, procedures,
contract clauses, and solicitation provisions for contractor employees
requiring routine access to their facilities and sensitive information
stored in agency networks.[Footnote 54]
Implementing HSPD-12 requirements through contract provisions helps
address the risks of contractors gaining unauthorized physical or
electronic access to federal information or contractors using outmoded
identification cards that can be easily forged, stolen, or altered to
allow unauthorized access. In 2009 the FAR Council opened a FAR case
in recognition of the need for return of the physical identification
cards issued to contractors.[Footnote 55] According to the FAR
Council, our review of contractor employees' access to sensitive
information reinforced the need to resolve this shortcoming in FAR
guidance.
[End of section]
Appendix VI: Comments from the Department of Homeland Security:
Note: Page numbers in the draft report may differ from those in this
report.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security:
Washington, DC 20528:
September 1, 2010:
Mr. John Needham:
Director, Acquisition and Sourcing Management:
Government Accountability Office:
Washington, DC 20548:
Dear Mr. Needham:
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the draft report GAO-10-
693 "Contractor Integrity: Stronger Safeguards Needed for Contractor
Access to Sensitive Information."
While DHS generally concurs with the contents of the GAO draft report,
we take exception to Table 3 on Page 16 of the draft report and one
comment on Page 17 of that report.
As noted in the draft report, GAO analyzed a total of 42 contracts
government-wide, including 14 DHS contracts. The GAO report asserts
that three of these 14 DHS contracts lacked the necessary safeguards
(per Table 3 of the draft report). The DHS Office of the Chief
Procurement Officer (OCPO) believes that one of these three DHS
contract actions contains adequate safeguards. Specific details for
this contract action are provided below:
* RSHQDC-06-J-00191, Systems Research and Applications Corp. (SRA),
executed on July 3, 2006, is for support services for planning,
implementing, and monitoring privacy regulations and guidelines. While
the task order does not contain HSAR 3052.204-71, it does effectively
contain the same language as HSAR 3052.204-71. The contract includes
the following four requirements:
- "(c) Contractor employees working on this contract must complete
such forms as may be necessary for security or other reasons,
including the conduct of background investigations to determine
suitability."
- "(d) The Contracting Officer may require the contractor to prohibit
individuals from working on the contract if the government deems their
initial or continued employment contrary to the public interest for
any reason..."
- "(e) ... the Contractor shall not disclose, orally or in writing,
any sensitive information to any person unless authorized in writing
by the Contracting Officer. For those contractor employees authorized
access to sensitive information, the contractor shall ensure that
these persons receive training concerning the protection and
disclosure of sensitive information both during and after contract
performance."
- "(f) The Contractor shall include the substance of this clause in
all subcontracts at any tier where the subcontractor may have access
to Government facilities, sensitive information, or resources."
(paragraphs (a) and (b) consist of definitions)
The following identifies language in the section of the task order
titled "Security Requirements" that is comparable to the four
requirements in HSAR 3052.204-71 ("Security Requirements" are on pages
5-10 of the statement of work (SOW) ” the task order pages are
unnumbered):
- Comparable to HSAR 3052.209-71(c): "Contract employees (to include
applicants, temporaries, part-time and replacement employees) under
the contract, needing access to sensitive information, shall undergo a
position sensitivity analysis based on the duties each individual will
perform on the contract. The results of the position sensitivity
analysis shall identify the appropriate background investigation to be
conducted. All background investigations will be processed through the
Security Office. Prospective Contractor employees shall submit the
following completed forms to the Security Office through the COTR no
more than two (2) weeks after, whether a replacement, addition,
subcontractor employee, or vendor:
1. Standard Form 85P, 'Questionnaire for Public Trust Positions.'
2. FD Form 258, 'Fingerprint Card' (2 copies).
3. Conditional Access to Sensitive But Unclassified Information Non-
Disclosure Agreement.
4. Disclosure and Authorization Pertaining to Consumer Reports
Pursuant to the Fair Credit Reporting Act" (page 7 of the SOW).
- Comparable to HSAR 3052 204-71(d): "DHS reserves the right and
prerogative to deny and/or restrict the facility and information
access of any Contractor employee whom DHS determines to present a
risk of compromising sensitive Government information to which he or
she would have access under this contract." (page 6 of the SOW).
- Comparable to HSAR 3052.204-711d. Several portions of the SOW
address disclosure and training:
1. The requirement in HSAR 3052.204-71(c) that contractor and
subcontractor employees complete the "Conditional Access to Sensitive
But Unclassified Information Non-Disclosure Agreement" (see above)
2. "When sensitive government information is processed on Department
telecommunications and automated information systems, the Contractor
agrees to provide for the administrative control of sensitive data
being processed and to adhere to the procedures governing such data as
outlined in OHS IT Security Program Publication DHS MD 4300.1" (page 9
of the SOW, under "Information Technology Security Clearance").
3. "Contractors, who are involved in management, use, or operation of
any IT systems that handle sensitive information within or under the
supervision of the Department, shall receive periodic training at
least annually in security awareness and accepted security practices
and systems rules of behavior. Department contractors, with
significant security operations, shall receive specialized training
specific to their security responsibilities annually" (page 9 of the
SOW, under "Information Technology Security Training and Oversight").
- Comparable to HSAR 3052104-71(1): Several portions of the SOW
address the flow-down of requirements to subcontractors:
1. Page 7 of the SOW requires each subcontractor employee to submit
four forms (see above).
2. "Some material will contain proprietary, sensitive, or classified
data from various public or private sources. The contractor shall
require all subcontractors to sign corporate and individual non-
disclosure agreements" (page 10 of the SOW, under "Other Pertinent
Information or Special Considerations").
3. "The Contractor shall ensure that each of its employees,
consultants, and subcontractors who work on the PCII [Protected
Critical Infrastructure Information] Program have executed Non-
Disclosure Agreements (NDAs) in a form prescribed by the PCII Program
Manager. The Contractor shall ensure that each of its employees,
consultants and subcontractors has executed a NDA and agrees that none
of its employees, consultants or subcontractors will be given access
to Protected C11 without having previously executed a NDA" (page 10 of
the SOW, under "Non-Disclosure of Protected Critical Infrastructure
Information").
Therefore, DHS OCPO believes that although HSHQDC-06-J-00191 does not
contain HSAR 3052.204-71, it dots contain comparable and adequate
language.
In addition, on Page 17, the second sentence of the first complete
paragraph states that: "For example, three DHS task orders of the 14
contract actions reviewed did not include the contract clause required
when contractors need recurring access to government facilities or
sensitive information." In accordance with the DHS OCPO comments
provided above regarding page 16, table 3, we believe that the SRA
task order, which is included as one of the three DHS task orders
noted as deficient within this sentence, actually does contain
adequate contract language with respect to contractor access to
sensitive information.
Thank you again for the opportunity to provide comments on he draft
report.
Sincerely,
Signed by:
Jerald E. Levine:
Director:
Departmental GAO/OIG Liaison Office:
[End of section]
Appendix VII: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments:
GAO Contact:
John K. Needham, (202) 512-4841 or needhamjk1@gao.gov:
Staff Acknowledgments:
In addition to the contact named above, Carolyn Kirby, Assistant
Director; Jennifer Dougherty; Guisseli Reyes-Turnell; Greg Campbell;
Vijay D'Souza; Claudia Dickey; Ralph Roffo; Tina Shepper Ryen; Alyssa
Weir; and Bill Woods made key contributions to this report.
[End of section]
Footnotes:
[1] In fiscal year 2009 alone, federal agencies obligated $332 billion
for contracted services, such as support for acquisition management,
program management, and quality assurance, which together accounted
for approximately 61 percent of total fiscal year 2009 procurement
dollars.
[2] Office of Management and Budget Memorandum, Managing the Multi-
Sector Workforce, M-09-26 (July 29, 2009). As used in this report,
"multisector workforce" includes the nongovernment contractor
employees (and subcontractors to prime contractors) working in various
agency offices with government employees. This can include situations
in which the contractor personnel may be physically separated from
government personnel at the agency worksite, but working in close
proximity at adjacent locations to enable routine access to agency
offices, officials, and information.
[3] FAR Subparts 1.1 and 1.3. The FAR and agency supplements are
codified in title 48 of the Code of Federal Regulations.
[4] Report of the Acquisition Advisory Panel to the Office of Federal
Procurement Policy and the United States Congress (January 2007). The
Services Acquisition Reform Act of 2003, Pub. L. No. 108-136, § 1423
(2003) established an Acquisition Advisory Panel to make
recommendations for improving acquisition practices.
[5] GAO, Federal Acquisition: Oversight Plan Needed to Help Implement
Acquisition Advisory Panel Recommendations, [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-160] (Washington, D.C.: Dec. 20,
2007).
[6] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO/AIMD-00-21.3.1]
(Washington, D.C.: November 1999). For example, the internal control
standards call for restrictions on access to and accountability for
resources and records, so that management assigns and maintains
accountability.
[7] For purposes of this report, we define a contract action as a
contract or task order, or both, and blanket purchase agreement (BPA)
and its associated orders. The FAR defines a task order as an order
for services placed against an established contract or with government
sources. FAR Section 2.101. The FAR allows agencies to establish BPAs
under the General Services Administration's schedules program, where
contracts are awarded to multiple vendors for commercial goods and
services and made available for agency use. FAR Subsection 8.405-3.
BPAs are agreements between agencies and vendors with terms in place
for future use; funds are obligated when orders are placed.
[8] The FAR Council--whose members include the DOD Director of Defense
Procurement and Acquisition Policy, the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration Associate Administrator for Procurement, and the
General Services Administration Chief Acquisition Officer--oversees
development and maintenance of the FAR. The Administrator of OFPP in
OMB serves as chair of the FAR Council, which meets quarterly to
discuss and resolve significant or controversial FAR changes. Proposed
and final revisions to the FAR are published in the Federal Register.
[9] For the purposes of this report, we use the definition of
confidentiality provided in the Federal Information Security
Management Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-296, § 1001 (44 U.S.C. §
3532). The act states that confidentiality means preserving authorized
restrictions on information access and disclosure, including means for
protecting personal privacy and proprietary information.
[10] The Privacy Act of 1974 (Privacy Act), Pub. L. No. 93-579
(codified at 5 U.S.C. § 552a) regulates the federal government's use
of personal information by placing limitations on agencies'
collection, disclosure, and use of personal information in systems of
records. The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of
1996, Pub. L. No. 104-191(HIPAA) among other things, addresses the
personal and medical privacy of individuals. Issued under HIPAA, the
federal Privacy Rule provided individuals with new protections
regarding the confidentiality of their health information and
established new responsibilities for health care providers, health
plans, and other entities, including the federal government, to
protect such information.
[11] See Executive Order 13526, Classified National Security
Information (Dec. 29, 2009). Among other provisions, the executive
order prescribes the categories of information that warrant
classification and prescribes standards for safeguarding classified
materials.
[12] 5 U.S.C. § 552. See GAO, Freedom of Information Act: Requirements
and Implementation Continue to Evolve, GAO-10-537T (Washington, D.C.:
Mar. 18, 2010).
[13] See [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-10-537T], which
provides the complete list of the nine categories of information that
are exempt from disclosure under FOIA, in attachment 1. In denying
access to material, agencies may cite these exemptions. The act
requires agencies to notify requesters of the reasons for any adverse
determination (that is, a determination not to provide records) and
grants requesters the right to appeal agency decisions to deny access.
[14] 18 U.S.C. § 1905 (disclosure of confidential information
generally) and 18 U.S.C. § 208 (acts affecting a personal financial
interest).
[15] Our review included contracts, task orders, and BPAs and their
associated orders. We reviewed one BPA that did not include provisions
that fully safeguarded against unauthorized contractor disclosure and
inappropriate use of sensitive information; however, we did not review
any orders off this agreement, and these may have contained additional
clauses to protect sensitive data.
[16] Agencies are authorized to issue regulations that implement or
supplement the FAR and incorporate agency policies, procedures,
contract clauses, solicitation provisions, and forms that govern the
contracting process or otherwise control the relationship between the
agency and contractors or prospective contractors. FAR Subpart 1.3.
[17] Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) Subpart
224.1, Protection of Individual Privacy.
[18] Department of Health and Human Services Acquisition Regulation
(HHSAR), Subpart 324.1, Protection of Individual Privacy.
[19] Under incident reporting procedures contained in a DHS security
management directive, with which the Department of Homeland Security
Acquisition Regulation (HSAR) states compliance is required in all
contracts that require access to sensitive information, DHS employees
or employees of contractors who observe or become aware of the loss,
compromise, suspected compromise, or unauthorized disclosure of "for
official use only" (FOUO) information (a type of sensitive
information) are required to report it immediately, but not later than
the next duty day, to the originator and the local security official.
Other than this requirement, the DHS directive does not establish
other contractor responsibilities, such as prompt notification to the
contracting officer.
[20] DFARS 204.4, Safeguarding Classified Information Within Industry.
In March 2010, an advance notice of proposed rulemaking was published
in the Federal Register. These proposed changes would add a new
subpart and associated contract clauses to DFARS for the safeguarding,
proper handling, and cyber intrusion reporting of unclassified DOD
information resident or transiting on contractor IT systems. 75 Fed.
Reg. 9563 (Mar. 3, 2010). The proposed changes do not address
safeguards for contractor employee access to sensitive information in
DOD's IT systems. A revised draft proposed rule is planned for
September 2010.
[21] HHS revised its FAR supplement effective January 2010 to reflect
statutory, FAR, and governmentwide and HHS policy changes since the
last revision in December 2006. Final Rule, Health and Human Services
Acquisition Regulation (HHSAR), 74 Fed. Reg. 62396-472 (Nov. 27, 2009).
[22] HHSAR 324.70--Confidentiality of Information (Dec. 20, 2006).
This clause related to confidential information, which was defined as
(1) information or data of a personal nature about an individual or
(2) proprietary information or data submitted by or pertaining to an
institution or organization.
[23] The pending changes referred to by the official are included in
FAR Case No. 2007-019, Contractor Access to Non-Public Information.
[24] According to DOD's privacy incident report, the information that
was breached was from a single contractor-owned server in Florida used
to hold and transfer data between individuals in different locations
to perform contract services. Potentially compromised files included
sensitive personal information such as name, social security number,
address, date of birth, medical record number, insurance information,
and information related to medical appointments and delivery of health
care services.
[25] Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), Acquisition
Policy & Procedure Notice 12, Privacy Rule HIPAA Business Associate
Contract Provision II (Baltimore, Md.: Apr. 21, 2005).
[26] We did not consider the absence of such contract provisions as a
deficiency unless they were also required by agency policy or the FAR.
[27] HSAR 3052.204-71.
[28] In May 2010, DHS notified the heads of its contracting activities
to caution their acquisition personnel to use only the official agency
nondisclosure agreement, DHS Form 11000-6, from the agency's internal
forms Web site. DHS took this action after we alerted them that case
study contracts we had reviewed were using an unauthorized variation
of the form that was missing date blocks for both the agreement
signatory and witness. According to DHS, any agreement that lacks
signature dates is incomplete and provides inadequate protection to
the signatories since there is no record of when the agreement takes
effect. The May 2010 updates to agency guidance and electronic
contract writing system require contracting personnel to use the forms
Web site to access DHS Form 11000-6.
[29] Air Force informational guidance on the use of such third-party
"associate contractor agreements" suggests standard contract
provisions requiring the contractor to provide the contracting officer
a copy of the document for review before execution by the cooperating
contractors.
[30] We have reported extensively on Treasury's management and
oversight of contractors and financial agents to support TARP. For
more information, see GAO, Troubled Asset Relief Program: One Year
Later, Actions Are Needed to Address Remaining Transparency and
Accountability Challenges, [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-10-16] (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 8,
2009).
[31] An example of Treasury's nondisclosure agreement used for TARP
support contractors is included in appendix IV.
[32] The FAR contains the rules, standards, and requirements for the
award, administration, and termination of government contracts.
[33] FAR Subpart 7.1.
[34] An organizational conflict of interest may result when factors
create an actual or potential conflict of interest on an instant
contract, or when the nature of the work to be performed on the
contract creates an actual or potential conflict of interest on a
future acquisition. For example, these conflicts may arise in
situations in which a current or prospective contractor or
subcontractor will have access to, or had access to, nonpublic
information that may provide an unfair competitive advantage in a
future acquisition.
[35] Final Rule, FAR Case 2005-017, Requirement to Purchase Approved
Authentication Products and Services, amended FAR Subpart 4.13 and
52.204-9. 72 Fed. Reg. 46333-35 (Aug. 17, 2007).
[36] Interim Rule, FAR Case 2004-018, Information Technology Security,
70 Fed. Reg. 57449-52, (Sept. 30, 2005). A year later, after
consideration of public comments, the interim rule was adopted without
change.
[37] GAO, Privacy: Lessons Learned about Data Breach Notification,
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-657] (Washington, D.C.:
Apr. 30, 2007). The loss of personally identifiable information, such
as an individual's Social Security number, name, and date of birth can
result in serious harm, including identity theft. Identity theft
occurs when such information is used without authorization to commit
fraud or other crimes.
[38] GAO, Defense Contracting: Additional Personal Conflict of
Interest Safeguards Needed for Certain DOD Contractor Employees,
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-169] (Washington, D.C.:
Mar. 7, 2008). A proposed FAR rule would define "personal conflict of
interest" as a situation in which a contractor employee has a
financial interest, personal activity, or relationship that could
impair the employee's ability to act impartially and in the best
interest of the government when performing under the contract.
[39] Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2009, Pub. L. No. 110-417, § 841 (2008). In addition, section 841
requires that the Administrator of OFPP develop FAR policies and
clauses effective no later than August 10, 2009, for inclusion in
solicitations, contracts, task orders, and delivery orders to prevent
personal conflicts of interest by contractor employees performing
acquisition functions closely associated with inherently governmental
functions.
[40] Pending FAR cases may result in requirements for prompt
notification of unauthorized disclosure or misuse, but will not
necessarily apply to all types of sensitive information.
[41] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO/AIMD-00-21.3.1]
(Washington, D.C.: November 1999).
[42] GAO, Information Sharing: The Federal Government Needs to
Establish Policies and Processes for Sharing Terrorism-Related and
Sensitive but Unclassified Information, [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-385] (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 17,
2006).
[43] Since 2005, the issue of establishing effective mechanisms for
sharing terrorism-related information to protect the homeland has been
on GAO's high-risk list of federal functions needing broad-based
transformation. Since then, we have monitored the government's
progress in resolving barriers to sharing. See GAO, Information
Sharing: Definition of the Results to Be Achieved in Terrorism-Related
Information Sharing Is Needed to Guide Implementation and Assess
Progress, [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-637T]
(Washington, D.C.: July 23, 2008).
[44] See Presidential Memorandum, Memorandum for the Heads of
Executive Departments and Agencies: Designation and Sharing Controlled
Unclassified Information (May 9, 2008).
[45] Report and Recommendations of the Presidential Task Force on
Controlled Unclassified Information (Aug. 25, 2009). The president's
memorandum of May 27, 2009, on Classified Information and Controlled
Unclassified Information directed the task force, led by the Secretary
of Homeland Security and the Attorney General, to review the
controlled unclassified information framework established in 2008 for
the management of sensitive but unclassified terrorism-related
information.
[46] HHS, Final Rule, Health and Human Services Acquisition
Regulation, 74 Fed. Reg. 62396-472 (Nov. 26, 2009).
[47] AFFARS Section 5303.104.
[48] The Department of Homeland Security Acquisition Regulation (HSAR)
Subpart 3004.470, Safeguarding Classified and Sensitive Information
within Industry and DHS Management Directive System, Safeguarding
Sensitive But Unclassified (For Official Use Only) Information,
Management Directive (MD) No. 11042.1 (Washington, D.C.: Jan. 6, 2005).
[49] GAO, Troubled Asset Relief Program: One Year Later, Actions Are
Needed to Address Remaining Transparency and Accountability
Challenges, [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-10-16]
(Washington, D.C.: Oct. 8, 2009).
[50] TARP Conflicts of Interest, 74 Fed. Reg. 3431-3436 (Jan. 21,
2009) (codified at 31 C.F.R. Part 31).
[51] GAO, Information Security: Improving Oversight of Access to
Federal Systems and Data by Contractors Can Reduce Risk, [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-05-362] (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 22,
2005). The IT systems and services provided by contractors include
computer and telecommunication systems and services, as well as the
testing, quality control, installation, and operation of computer
equipment. Additionally, contractors provide services and systems on
behalf of agencies at contractor facilities or to an agency via remote
access. We found that the methods that agencies were using to ensure
information security oversight of contractor operations had
limitations and needed strengthening. For example, most agencies had
not incorporated the Federal Information Security Management Act of
2002 (FISMA) requirements, such as annual testing of controls, into
their contract language. Few agencies had established specific
information-security oversight policies for contractor IT operations.
[52] Interim Rule, FAR Case 2004-018, Information Technology Security,
70 Fed. Reg. 57449-52, (Sept. 30, 2005). A year later, after
consideration of public comments, the interim rule was adopted without
change.
[53] Final Rule, FAR Case 2005-017, Requirement to Purchase Approved
Authentication Products and Services, amended FAR Subpart 4.13 and
52.204-9. 72 Fed. Reg. 46333-35 (Aug. 17, 2007).
[54] For example, effective January 26, 2010, the Department of Health
and Human Services (HHS) revised its FAR supplement to reflect FAR
policy and other changes since the last update in December 2006. A new
Subpart 304.13, Personal Identity Verification, was added with new
policy to implement HSPD-12 in HHS. The HHS implementation includes
applicable solicitation provisions and contract clauses to provide a
consistent and systematic approach to ensure the security of HHS
facilities and information systems. 74 Fed. Reg. 62396-97 (Nov. 27,
2009).
[55] FAR case number 2009-027--Personal Identity Verification of
Contractor Personnel. The proposed rule for this case was published in
the Federal Register for public comment. 75 Fed. Reg. 28771 (May 24,
2010). The proposed rule seeks to provide additional regulatory
coverage in FAR Subpart 4.13 and clause 52.204-9 to reinforce the
requirement of collecting from contractors all forms of government-
provided identification once they are no longer needed to support a
contract. Public comments were due July 23, 2010.
[56] HHS, Final Rule, Health and Human Services Acquisition
Regulation, 74 Fed. Reg. 62396472 (Nov. 26, 2009).
[End of section]
GAO's Mission:
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting
its constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance
and accountability of the federal government for the American people.
GAO examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and
policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance
to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding
decisions. GAO's commitment to good government is reflected in its core
values of accountability, integrity, and reliability.
Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony:
The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no
cost is through GAO's Web site [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. Each
weekday, GAO posts newly released reports, testimony, and
correspondence on its Web site. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly
posted products every afternoon, go to [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]
and select "E-mail Updates."
Order by Phone:
The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO‘s actual cost of
production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the
publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black and
white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO‘s Web site,
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm].
Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or
TDD (202) 512-2537.
Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card,
MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional
information.
To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs:
Contact:
Web site: [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm]:
E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov:
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470:
Congressional Relations:
Ralph Dawn, Managing Director, dawnr@gao.gov:
(202) 512-4400:
U.S. Government Accountability Office:
441 G Street NW, Room 7125:
Washington, D.C. 20548:
Public Affairs:
Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov:
(202) 512-4800:
U.S. Government Accountability Office:
441 G Street NW, Room 7149:
Washington, D.C. 20548:
