White House: Follow-Up on Acquisition of Automated Resume Processing
(Letter Report, 08/03/94, GAO/GGD-94-127).
After the initial letter contract was awarded in February 1993, the
White House prepared the documentation required under the federal
regulations to justify its sole-source acquisition of Resumix--an
automated resume processing system--under urgent and compelling
circumstances. The documentation indicated that the new administration
needed information on a large number of potential candidates quickly and
that Resumix was superior to the existing White House system in terms of
entering resumes, searching for candidates, and compiling lists of
candidates. Also, fewer staff were needed to operate Resumix. Although
the contract file did contain detailed price information and a statement
that the Contracting Office had determined that the Resumix price was
fair and reasonable, the supporting documentation was insufficient to
demonstrate that the White House obtained a fair and reasonable price.
In addition, the Resumix acquisition did not fully follow federal
government procurement regulations in the following areas: some items
were omitted from the requirements analysis, certified cost or pricing
data were not obtained from the supplier, and a competition advocate did
not approve the justification for the sole-source acquisition.
--------------------------- Indexing Terms -----------------------------
REPORTNUM: GGD-94-127
TITLE: White House: Follow-Up on Acquisition of Automated Resume
Processing
DATE: 08/03/94
SUBJECT: Presidential appointments
Computerized information systems
Sole source procurement
Procurement regulation
Personnel recruiting
Information processing operations
Procurement procedures
Leases
Documentation
Cost analysis
IDENTIFIER: White House Resumix Computer System
Federal Supply Schedule
**************************************************************************
* This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a GAO *
* report. Delineations within the text indicating chapter titles, *
* headings, and bullets are preserved. Major divisions and subdivisions *
* of the text, such as Chapters, Sections, and Appendixes, are *
* identified by double and single lines. The numbers on the right end *
* of these lines indicate the position of each of the subsections in the *
* document outline. These numbers do NOT correspond with the page *
* numbers of the printed product. *
* *
* No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although figure *
* captions are reproduced. Tables are included, but may not resemble *
* those in the printed version. *
* *
* A printed copy of this report may be obtained from the GAO Document *
* Distribution Facility by calling (202) 512-6000, by faxing your *
* request to (301) 258-4066, or by writing to P.O. Box 6015, *
* Gaithersburg, MD 20884-6015. We are unable to accept electronic orders *
* for printed documents at this time. *
**************************************************************************
Cover
================================================================ COVER
Report to the Ranking Minority Member, Committee on Government
Operations, House of Representatives
August 1994
WHITE HOUSE - FOLLOW-UP ON
ACQUISITION OF AUTOMATED RESUME
PROCESSING
GAO/GGD-94-127
Automated Resume Processing System
Abbreviations
=============================================================== ABBREV
EOP - Executive Office of the President
FAR - Federal Acquisition Regulation
FIRMR - Federal Information Resources Management Regulation
GSA - General Services Administration
PPO - Office of Presidential Personnel
Letter
=============================================================== LETTER
B-256909
August 3, 1994
The Honorable William F. Clinger, Jr.
Ranking Minority Member
Committee on Government Operations
House of Representatives
Dear Mr. Clinger:
This report responds to your request that we follow up on actions
taken by the White House regarding its acquisition of an automated
resume processing system (Resumix) since our June 1993 report.\1 You
asked us to determine if the White House followed applicable
procurement regulations. You also asked us to answer specific
questions, listed in the appendix, about the acquisition and use of
the Resumix system.
On February 2, 1993, the White House issued a sole-source letter
contract to lease the Resumix system for at least 3 months. In our
June 1993 report, we reported that the White House had not yet
completed all federal procurement regulation requirements for the
acquisition of Resumix. The White House had not prepared
documentation to justify the sole-source acquisition of Resumix under
urgent and compelling circumstances, a requirements analysis, or a
determination that the price paid was fair and reasonable. In August
1993, the White House executed a negotiated 6-month replacement lease
with an option to purchase the system. On the same day, the White
House exercised the option to purchase Resumix for $225,800.
--------------------
\1 White House: Acquisition of Automated Resume Processing System
(GAO/GGD-93-117, June 17, 1993).
RESULTS IN BRIEF
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :1
After the initial letter contract was awarded on February 2, 1993,
the White House prepared the documentation required under federal
procurement regulations to justify its sole-source acquisition of
Resumix under urgent and compelling circumstances. Federal
regulations allow this to be done after the initial lease. The
documentation indicated that the new administration needed
information on a large number of potential candidates quickly and
that Resumix was superior to the existing White House system in terms
of entering resumes, searching for candidates, and producing lists of
candidates. In addition, the documentation indicated that Resumix
required fewer staff resources to operate.
While the contract file did contain some detailed price information
and a statement that the Contracting Officer had made a determination
that the Resumix price was fair and reasonable, there was
insufficient supporting documentation to demonstrate that the White
House obtained a fair and reasonable price for the Resumix system.
In addition, the Resumix acquisition did not fully follow federal
government procurement regulations in the following respects:
certain items were omitted from the requirements analysis, certified
cost or pricing data were not obtained from the supplier, and a
competition advocate did not approve the justification for the
sole-source acquisition.\2
--------------------
\2 A competition advocate is an official reporting to an agency's
senior procurement official and is responsible for promoting full and
open competition and challenging barriers to competition.
BACKGROUND
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :2
About 1 and one-half weeks after the Presidential Inauguration in
January 1993, White House officials decided to move into the White
House personnel office an automated resume processing system called
Resumix that had been used by the Clinton Transition Planning
Foundation. Resumix uses optical scanning and other state-of-the-art
technology to enter resume and related information into an automated
database. The system is also capable of automatically searching and
extracting lists of candidates meeting specified qualifications.
As stated in our prior report, White House officials told us that the
existing Office of Presidential Personnel (PPO) system was inferior
to Resumix because the PPO system (1) was slower in searching for
candidates, (2) could not produce lists of candidates in priority
order, and (3) was much more labor intensive because it did not use
optical scanning technology. In addition, they thought that it would
have been more expensive to modify the PPO system than to acquire
Resumix. They said that to add optical scanners, the system software
would have to be reprogrammed and additional memory and optical
character reading capability added to the associated minicomputers.
Further, they said this would have been time consuming and would have
substantially slowed other Executive Office of the President (EOP)
systems operating on the minicomputers. White House officials also
said that, with the President's goal of reducing White House staff by
25 percent and the large number of resumes expected to be submitted
to the first Democratic administration in 12 years, they thought that
they needed a system that used fewer staff resources than the
existing PPO system.
As we did the work for our June 1993 report, White House officials
and a volunteer technology consultant to the transition team told us
that during the transition they did not have time to conduct a
complete search of available resume processing systems and relied on
the expertise of several consultants to select a system. We were
shown descriptive folders from several vendors that had been
considered, including Resumix, Restrac, Lotus Notes, Harris,
Protech/Optika, and Alosview. The search was narrowed to the two
systems that were specifically designed to process resumes--Resumix
and Restrac.
On February 2, 1993, the Assistant to the President for Management
and Administration wrote to Resumix, Inc., agreeing to lease the
Resumix system for $22,580 per month for at least 3 months, starting
on January 24, 1993. Eighty percent of the lease payments were to be
applied to a purchase price of $225,800 if the White House later
decided to purchase the system. The February 2 letter contract
stated that the White House would reevaluate the system after 3
months and decide whether to continue to lease or purchase the
system. The White House officials said they acquired the Resumix
system on a sole-source basis because of the urgent and compelling
need for the system and because a competitive acquisition likely
would have taken about 1 year to complete.\3 Procurement regulations
allow an exception to full and open competition when there is an
unusual and compelling urgency to procure a needed item and there is
insufficient time for full and open competition.
In our June 1993 report, we noted that although federal procurement
regulations allow sole-source contracting in urgent and compelling
circumstances, they also require that certain justifications and a
requirements analysis be made and documented within a reasonable
period after contract award. As of June 1993, 4 months after Resumix
was leased, the White House still had not met all requirements. We
concluded that meeting these requirements before the end of the
3-month lease period would have been a better business practice. We
made no recommendations because the White House officials said they
expected soon to execute a replacement lease for the system in
accordance with federal contracting regulations.
--------------------
\3 A General Services Administration (GSA) contracting officer in the
Information Resources Management Service told us that it would not be
unusual for a competitive procurement to take 12 months to complete.
OBJECTIVES, SCOPE, AND
METHODOLOGY
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :3
Our objectives for this assignment were to determine whether the EOP
complied with federal procurement regulations in the acquisition of
Resumix and to obtain information on various specific questions you
asked. We grouped your specific questions into the following four
areas: (1) the February 2, 1993, letter contract; (2) a 6-month
replacement lease; (3) a subsequent Resumix purchase; and (4) the
numbers of resumes processed and not processed during specific time
frames and use of Resumix data.
To meet our objectives, we interviewed White House officials involved
with the acquisition and use of Resumix, including the EOP
Contracting Officer and the Director of Information Systems of the
Office of Presidential Personnel. We also reviewed documents that
the White House provided on the Resumix acquisition, including the
procurement file, and the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and
the Federal Information Resources Management Regulation (FIRMR).
Further, we asked the White House to provide information on the
number of resumes processed in the time period you were interested
in.
We did our work in accordance with generally accepted government
auditing standards from December 1993 to June 1994 in Washington,
D.C. Further details on the objectives, scope, and methodology of
our work are contained in the appendix. We obtained oral comments
from White House officials, which we incorporated in this report as
appropriate.
FEBRUARY 2, 1993, LETTER
CONTRACT
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :4
On August 6, 1993, the White House completed a sole-source
justification to support the negotiated February 2, 1993, letter
contract.\4 This justification contained a requirements analysis that
did not contain all of the elements required by the FIRMR.
The FIRMR requires agencies to prepare a requirements analysis " . .
. commensurate with the size and complexity of the need." According
to the FIRMR, the requirements analysis shall include, at a minimum,
information in 10 areas: (1) information needs, (2) system life, (3)
a description of requirements, (4) compatibility-limited
requirements, (5) justification for specific make and model, (6)
security requirements, (7) accessibility requirements for individuals
with disabilities, (8) space and environmental requirements, (9)
workload and related requirements, and (10) records management
requirements.
The White House's requirements analysis included data on
information needs,
a description of requirements,
compatibility-limited requirements,
justification for specific make and model, and
workload requirements.
Areas not specifically addressed were those relating to
system life,
security requirements,
accessibility requirements for individuals with disabilities,
space and environmental factors, and
records management requirements.
The EOP Contracting Officer said he viewed the latter requirements as
guidelines that did not need to be addressed in a relatively small
contract. In response to our inquiries about the areas not
addressed, EOP officials said that (1) the system would last and be
needed for at least 4 years; (2) the system was located in a secure
environment because it is located in the Old Executive Office
Building, which has controlled access; (3) handicapped individuals
actually use the system; and (4) the FIRMR requirements for space and
environmental factors and records management were not specific.
In commenting on a draft of this report, EOP officials said that the
system life of the equipment and system was from 4 to 6 years and
reasonably longer since the Resumix system is an open system that is
easily upgraded; thus, system life ultimately is dependent upon the
approach taken by each administration--it will be much longer if this
or subsequent administrations continue to use the same approach.
You asked us to examine an apparent overlap between the transition
team's lease, which ended on February 18, 1993, and the White House's
initial 3-month lease of the same Resumix system, which began on
January 24, 1993, according to the original letter contract and
whether appropriated funds were used for both leases. The EOP
Contracting Officer said that he had no contact with the transition
team and was not aware that the team had a lease for the same system
through February 18. However, he said that the starting date for the
White House's replacement lease, which is discussed later in this
report, was changed in August 1993 to reflect the date they believed
the Resumix system was installed in the White House--February 4,
1993. Although this reduced the overlap in the transition team's and
the White House's leases to a 14-day period (February 4 to February
18), it did not completely eliminate the overlap.
White House officials said they viewed the overlap as not relevant
because (1) no appropriated funds were used for the transition lease
(General Services Administration (GSA) officials who assisted the
transition team in acquiring computer equipment provided us
documentation showing that appropriated funds were not used for the
transition lease) and (2) the White House had a responsibility to pay
for the system once it was installed in the White House, which as far
as they could determine, was on February 4, 1993,\5 without regard to
whether the transition team was able to obtain a credit for the time
the equipment was not used by the transition team.
--------------------
\4 This justification also was used to support a subsequent
replacement lease and the purchase of the system, which are discussed
later in this report.
\5 White House officials were not able to provide documentation
showing the specific date that Resumix was installed in the White
House.
SIX-MONTH REPLACEMENT LEASE
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :5
On August 13, 1993, the White House executed a negotiated 6-month
replacement lease with an option to purchase the Resumix system. The
lease period began on February 4, 1993, and ended on August 4, 1993,
9 days before the replacement lease was executed. This lease with
purchase option definitized the original letter contract.\6 Federal
procurement regulations allow definitization of a letter contract
within 180 days after contract award, but this period can be extended
by the Contracting Officer. The White House obligated a total of
$265,965 for the lease under two May 1993 delegations of authority
from the Assistant to the President for Management and
Administration. The total lease and maintenance cost of the Resumix
system for the 6-month period was $143,536, which included the
$67,740 for the 3-month lease under the letter contract. The White
House appropriation account for 1993 was used for this lease.
--------------------
\6 Definitization occurs when a definite contract, with all of the
required terms and conditions, is signed subsequent to the issuance
of a less specific letter contract.
RESUMIX PURCHASE
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :6
On August 13, 1993, the White House also exercised the purchase
option for the Resumix system for $225,800. White House officials
showed us documentation that the $225,800 Resumix purchase was paid
out of the White House Office appropriation account for fiscal year
1993. The purchase agreement gave the White House a credit of
$108,348 representing 80 percent of the $135,480 in lease payments
made through August 1993.\7 The buy-out price was $117,452. The
purchase included hardware such as seven workstations, a scanner, and
two printers, as well as software licenses and training.
--------------------
\7 The $135,480 in lease payments excludes $8,056 in maintenance
costs for the 6-month period.
PRICE DETERMINATION
---------------------------------------------------------- Letter :6.1
For negotiated contracts, the FAR requires contracting officers to
determine if the price paid is fair and reasonable and to document
the cost or price evaluation. Although the Contracting Officer made
a determination, as required by the FAR, that the Resumix price was
fair and reasonable, the contract file did not contain sufficient
documentation to demonstrate that the price obtained was fair and
reasonable. In addition, the Contracting Officer did not obtain
required certified cost or pricing data from Resumix.
The EOP Contracting Officer said that he contacted another Resumix
user, the University of California Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, to
compare system prices. The Contracting Officer said that
verification was made through his conversation with a Berkeley
Laboratory official that the White House was paying the same price
for individual components of the system as the laboratory. The
Berkeley official could not remember all of the details of the
discussion with the EOP Contracting Officer, but told us that the
costs of the laboratory's Resumix software licenses and some hardware
may have been discussed with the EOP Contracting Officer. However,
the Berkeley official also said he remembered that because the
laboratory already possessed in-house hardware or obtained most of
the hardware for the Resumix system directly from the manufacturer,
Berkeley did not purchase the same system from Resumix that the White
House purchased. While White House officials told us that system
price comparisons were performed, the EOP procurement file did not
contain a comparison of the total system prices or of the unit prices
that the White House and Berkeley paid.
The FAR requires that agencies obtain certified cost or pricing
data.\8 The White House's procurement file did not contain any
documentation of this data or the White House's request for it.
According to a White House official, Resumix was not willing to
provide a unit price breakdown for the hardware and software covered
by the contract when the White House orally requested this
information from Resumix.
The contract file showed that, in an attempt to demonstrate that the
Resumix price was fair and reasonable, the EOP Contracting Officer
calculated the cost of buying the system hardware from GSA Federal
Supply Schedules to be $86,546. Because the Resumix system,
including the software used in the system, was not on the GSA
schedules, the EOP Contracting Officer estimated the software portion
of the contract to be $122,250 by calculating the difference between
the $225,800 contract price less the $86,546 estimated hardware cost
and $17,950 for training.\9 White House officials said they did not
ask Resumix if they could acquire just the software from Resumix and
the hardware from a different vendor because of the disruption and
added costs that would be associated with reinstalling new hardware
and ensuring its compatibility with the existing software. Another
White House official also expressed concern that the White House
would not receive adequate support from Resumix if it acquired the
hardware from a different vendor.
A White House official also said that the Resumix contract was
compared with other computer systems in the EOP of similar
complexity, including the Quorum correspondence system and the Office
of Administration Library's inventory system and determined that the
Resumix system was less expensive than these systems. However, these
systems are used for different purposes and use different hardware
and software than the Resumix system.
--------------------
\8 The FAR requires that certified cost or pricing data be obtained
from the supplier before the award of any negotiated contract that is
expected to exceed $100,000, except for undefinitized actions such as
a letter contract. Although cost or pricing data were not required
for the February 2, 1993, letter contract, they were required for the
definitized contract with Resumix. According to the FAR, cost or
pricing data "means all facts as of the date of price agreement that
prudent buyers and sellers would reasonably expect to affect price
negotiations significantly."
\9 We calculated the software cost estimate, on the basis of the EOP
Contracting Officer's methodology and figures, to be $121,304, rather
than $122,250.
NEEDS DETERMINATION
---------------------------------------------------------- Letter :6.2
An EOP Contract Administrator prepared a price negotiation memorandum
on August 3, 1993, recommending that the White House purchase the
system rather than lease it. The memorandum indicated that leasing
the system for 42 months would have cost $438,276, compared with the
$225,800 purchase price. A White House official told us that the
demands on the placement mission of the White House Office of
Presidential Personnel will require the use of the Resumix system
throughout the present administration, whether for one term or two,
and that the system would greatly assist any succeeding
administration in fulfilling its placement mission.
According to a former Bush administration official, who also worked
for the White House during the first 3 months of the Clinton
administration, the White House also received a comparable number of
resumes when President Bush succeeded President Reagan. To process
this large number of resumes during the first 3 months of the
administration, the Bush White House hired additional temporary data
entry personnel. This former official said that the Clinton
administration also could have hired additional temporary data entry
personnel and used the existing PPO system, eliminating the need to
acquire Resumix.
In commenting on a draft of this report, Clinton administration
officials said that this course of action was not available for
several reasons. First, the minicomputer on which the PPO system
operated, which also carried other EOP systems (i.e., the electronic
mail system), was operating at full capacity; existing minicomputer
resources could not support the other active EOP systems and a
significant increase in PPO activity. Second, the existing PPO
system was outdated; the system was created in 1982 using
then-current technology and was excessively labor dependent. Third,
the method used by the former Bush administration official to address
the large influx of resumes during transitions was to bring detailees
for data entry from other agencies to the White House--an option that
Congress eliminated through an amendment to the White House
appropriations budget in 1989 (the year after the Bush administration
official's last transition). Clinton administration officials also
said that updating the technology of the existing PPO system to take
advantage of current technology and reduce reliance on paper files
would have been considerably more expensive than purchasing a
commercial package designed to handle the White House's needs in an
economical and efficient manner.\10
Clinton administration officials said they did not consider using the
PPO system with additional personnel because of the President's goal
of reducing the White House staff by 25 percent. In addition, the
sole-source justification of the acquisition of the Resumix system
concluded that the PPO system "long ago became outdated" and that it
was "insufficient to deliver the level of performance required."
White House officials said that modifying the PPO system would have
necessitated adding optical character reading capability to the
system, reprogramming system software, and adding additional memory.
On August 6, 1993, the White House justified using other than full
and open competition on an unusual and compelling urgency basis. The
justification stated, among other things, that
the operational needs were urgent and compelling;
the acquisition of Resumix was essential to preserve the
effectiveness of the White House Office of Presidential
Personnel;
unless automation could be used effectively, the work flow plan for
the Office of Presidential Personnel would have to be
reorganized and would require a larger staff;
reliance on the PPO system had already carried a cost in lost time
and slowed performance, and
since the Resumix system was already in place and the only other
system found to be a serious competitor was eliminated during
system evaluation, it was determined that advertising in the
Commerce Business Daily would not produce any unknown source.
The justification concluded that it was in the government's best
interest to acquire Resumix on a sole-source basis to support the
White House Office of Presidential Personnel.
--------------------
\10 The White House had not formally compared the costs of upgrading
the PPO system to the costs of acquiring Resumix and therefore could
not quantify the savings, if any, of acquiring Resumix.
COMPETITION REVIEW
---------------------------------------------------------- Letter :6.3
The FAR requires the head of each agency to designate a competition
advocate for the agency and for each procuring activity of the
agency. According to the FAR, the competition advocate is to report
to the agency's senior procurement executive and be responsible for
challenging barriers to competition and promoting full and open
competition. Federal procurement regulations also require that
justifications for sole-source procurements between $100,000 and $1
million be approved by the procuring activity's competition advocate.
White House officials said that the White House did not have a
competition advocate from at least 1990 until September 1993, when a
competition advocate was appointed. Therefore, the White House did
not have a competition advocate when the Resumix award was signed.
White House officials also said that it was unnecessary for a
competition advocate to approve this procurement because the Director
of the Office of Management and Administration, to whom a competition
advocate would report, signed the delegation of procurement authority
for the original letter contract and the subsequent definitized
contract.
NUMBER OF RESUMES PROCESSED AND
USE OF THE RESUMIX DATA
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :7
A White House Office of Management and Administration official
furnished us with data generated from the Resumix system showing that
53,963 resumes had been processed as of September 15, 1993. White
House data also showed that 887 resumes were processed from August
15, 1993, through September 15, 1993. This official said the White
House was unable to respond to our specific request that they
determine the number of resumes that were not processed during the
30-day period ending September 30, 1993. The official said that as
of November 16, 1993, all submitted resumes had been processed.
According to a White House Office of Management and Administration
official, neither the Resumix system, nor any of its subsystems, is
accessed by any organizational entity of the White House Office other
than the Presidential Personnel Office; although information obtained
from the system--i.e., lists of candidates, resumes, letters of
recommendation--may be provided to other EOP offices. White House
officials also said the data stored in the Resumix system is not used
for any purpose other than the presidential appointment process. The
White House Director of Information Systems told us that the system
data on individuals stored in Resumix has not been transferred to any
government, political, or nongovernment entity.
CONCLUSIONS
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :8
While the contract file did contain some detailed price information
and a statement that the Contracting Officer had made a determination
that the Resumix price was fair and reasonable, there was
insufficient supporting documentation to demonstrate that the White
House obtained a fair and reasonable price for the Resumix system.
In addition, the Resumix acquisition did not fully follow federal
procurement regulations in the following respects: certain items
were omitted from the requirements analysis, certified cost or
pricing data were not obtained from the supplier, and the White House
did not have a competition advocate to review the justification for
the sole-source acquisition.
WHITE HOUSE COMMENTS
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :9
We provided White House officials, including the Special Assistant to
the President and Director, Office of Administration, and an
Associate Counsel to the President, an opportunity to review and
comment on a draft of this report in late June 1994. We incorporated
their oral comments in this report as appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------- Letter :9.1
We are sending copies of this letter to interested congressional
committees; the Assistant to the President for Management and
Administration; the President of Resumix, Inc.; and other interested
parties. We will also make copies available to others upon request.
If you have any questions about this report, please call me on (202)
512-8387. Other major contributors to this report were John S.
Baldwin, Sr., Assistant Director; Robert Homan, Evaluator-in-Charge;
and V. Bruce Goddard, Senior Attorney.
Sincerely yours,
J. William Gadsby
Director, Government Business
Operations Issues
OBJECTIVES, SCOPE, AND METHODOLOGY
=========================================================== Appendix I
Our objectives were to evaluate whether the EOP complied with federal
procurement regulations in acquiring Resumix and to obtain
information on various questions you asked that we grouped into four
areas: (1) the February 2, 1993, letter contract; (2) a 6-month
replacement lease; (3) a subsequent Resumix purchase; and (4) the
number of resumes processed and use of Resumix data.
With respect to the White House's February 2, 1993, letter contract
with Resumix, you asked us to determine (1) whether, and if so when,
the White House completed a sole-source justification and
requirements analysis to support the letter contract; (2) the total
dollar amount expended under the terms of the letter contract; (3)
which EOP agency or agencies paid for the lease; and (4) whether the
White House complied with federal procurement regulations.
You asked whether the White House executed a planned 6-month
replacement lease with Resumix, and if so, (1) the beginning and
ending dates of the replacement lease and when it was signed; (2)
which EOP agency or agencies paid for the lease; (3) whether the
White House evaluated prices paid by comparable Resumix users; (4)
whether the replacement lease corrected a discrepancy regarding the
beginning date of the February 2, 1993, lease; (5) whether the lease
included a purchase option; (6) the total dollar amount of the lease;
and (7) whether the White House complied with federal procurement
regulations.
You also asked whether the White House later purchased the Resumix
system, and if so, (1) what equipment was purchased, (2) what EOP
agency or agencies paid for the purchase, (3) whether the purchase
was negotiated or advertised, and (4) whether the White House
complied with federal procurement regulations.
Further, you asked us to obtain information regarding (1) the number
of resumes processed by Resumix as of September 15, 1993; (2) the
number of resumes processed during the period August 15, 1993, to
September 15, 1993; and (3) the number of resumes that were
unprocessed during the 30-day period ending September 30, 1993.
You also asked us to determine whether the Resumix system, or any of
its subsystems, is used by any organizational entity of the White
House other than the Office of Presidential Personnel and, if so, to
identify the user and why the system was used. In addition, you
asked us to determine whether the data on individuals stored in
Resumix are used for any purpose other than the presidential
appointment process. Finally, you asked us to determine whether any
of the data on individuals stored in the Resumix system have been
transferred to any government or nongovernment entity and, if so, to
identify that entity.
When we briefed you on the status of our work on March 14, 1994, you
asked us to determine (1) whether the Clinton transition team used
appropriated funds for its lease of the Resumix system, (2) whether
the sole-source acquisition of the Resumix system was adequately
justified, and (3) which appropriation account was used for the
Resumix purchase.
To meet our objectives, we interviewed White House officials involved
with the acquisition and use of Resumix, including the EOP
Contracting Officer and the Director of Information Systems of the
Office of Presidential Personnel. We also interviewed an official
involved in procuring a Resumix system at the University of
California Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, whom the EOP procurement
office had identified as providing cost information, and former Bush
administration officials who were familiar with the PPO system. We
also reviewed documents that the White House provided on the Resumix
acquisition, including the procurement file, and the FAR and the
FIRMR. Further, at our request, the White House provided information
on the number of resumes processed as of September 15, 1993, and from
August 15, 1993, to September 15, 1993.