Recovery.Gov Project Tracker

MSimon · Post by **MSimon** » Sat Sep 18, 2010 11:06 pm

ladjo,

Keep on them. This seems more profitable than FOIA.

Post by **JoeStrout** » Fri Oct 08, 2010 4:39 am

I agree, this sounds like it was making progress. I cringe to think we may be causing headaches for Dr. Nebel, but on the other hand, it doesn't look (from the outside, at least) like these reporting requirements are too onerous, and if you're getting government funding, you can expect to have to report.

I might wildly speculate that poor Rick is being pulled in two directions — being told in no uncertain terms that he must NOT report, by one set of masters, while the Recovery Act bureaucrats insist that he do. This situation could arise if his results are so promising that the military wants to go completely dark with it, government transparency be damned. And that, in the grand scheme of things, would be a good thing, since it would mean that polywell fusion actually works. But we still want our updates anyway!

rcain · Post by **rcain** » Fri Oct 08, 2010 10:27 am

ladajo wrote:They are looking deeper into why EMC2 does not show a posted report from last quarter. This now involves OMB and the Fraud Team.

oh, no, not the Fraud Team - dont tell me, there has been an accusation of government and science being complicit in Voodoo

seriously, top marks ladajo - keep up the good work, we are very grateful. at least we are now getting a murma of whats going on.

ladajo · Post by **ladajo** » Fri Oct 08, 2010 1:05 pm

As the OMB Folks subbed to Recovery.gov get their act together, they are getting more serious about getting it right. Below is a link to current guidance on reporting non-compliers, and what to do about it.

EMC2 is an active non-complier case. Since EMC2 has missed one quarter, they get the poke in the eye treatment. If they miss this quarter, things ramp up. It also becomes a pain for NAVAIR as the contract manager.

The other issue that EMC2 faces is that they have not included reporting on sub-contracts they have issued ISO them as the prime contract. They are required to do that. Hopefully they will play catch up on that piece as well.

It would really surprise me if they do not report again. Hopefully I will get a heads up from my contact if they have prior to the end of month postings.

http://www.recovery.gov/FAQ/Documents/m-10-17.pdf

From the link:
Federal agencies will obtain recipient compliance with the Recovery Act, Section 1512 reporting responsibilities or they will utilize the sanctions or remedies provided under 2 CFR Part 176 for recipients of grants or other non-contractual awards, and FAR Section 4.1501(c) and (d) and, when determined appropriate, the processes identified in the termination clause for recipients of Federal contract awards. Sanctions or remedies may include:
• Terminating Federal funding
• Initiating suspension and debarment of the prime recipient
• Taking other enforcement action as the agency determines appropriate to the circumstances.

Aero · Post by **Aero** » Fri Oct 08, 2010 1:50 pm

The reporting requirements have some serious teeth, if I'm reading that correctly. Note that those charged with enforcing the reporting requirements at the highest levels have no interest in the contract or the context of the work, their job is to get a report. Of course, the report should be on the contract or context of the work.

It does look to me like they interface with the Navy, not directly with EMC2.

ladajo, what is the chain of responsibility for submitting the report? And what type of information is supposed to be contained in the report, do you know? Does it hit on the proprietary information bugaboo?

KitemanSA · Post by **KitemanSA** » Fri Oct 08, 2010 3:18 pm

Does anyone know what happens if the Contractor reports but the Agency doesn't submit it?

ladajo · Post by **ladajo** » Fri Oct 08, 2010 11:14 pm

My understanding is the the contractors report directly to recovery.gov via a unified submission site. And then the federal agency does a data mash up that sees who submitted and who didn;t and then submits their own data. There is allowance for recipient reporting and agency reporting. And no, the two do not have to match. (althohug in theory they should). The differnce comes inthe agencies tracking money more often (weekly) than the recipients (quarterly).
The Federal Agency responsible for eye poking the recipients in EMC2's case is NAVAIR. ONR is not in that loop, as they do not manage the contract. So, as I understand it, EMC2 fails to report, OMB sees it (maybe NAVAIR sees it too). OMB says to NAVAIR, "what up with that? What are you doing about it, IAW presidential guidelines?" NAVAIR says, "we eye poked them it was the first miss", blah blah blah...
If you read the pdf I linked it explains the process steps well. NAVAIR is the Belly Button for OMB.

choff · Post by **choff** » Sat Oct 09, 2010 12:38 am

Is there any risk that EMC2 could be tied up in legal proceedings to the detriment of delaying the research and submitting a final report. They might not have final control over reporting.

ladajo · Post by **ladajo** » Sat Oct 09, 2010 12:34 pm

I don't think so. THe way the system is set up, it is on the Recipient to make reports for accepting the money, it is on the managing Agency to beat them up if they don't.
EMC2 is going to have to report something, or face issues. I do not think they will not report.

chrismb · Post by **chrismb** » Sat Oct 09, 2010 2:56 pm

...or EMC2 will claim "it's commercially sensitive now, best we don't make our information public. We claim exceptional circumstances." and the bank-rollers of the project do what they've already done; say "OK" and roll over to have their tummies tickled.

(OK, so I'm the one following the cynics path - I standby awaiting a correction to my line....)

Aero · Post by **Aero** » Sat Oct 09, 2010 4:11 pm

chrismb wrote:...or EMC2 will claim "it's commercially sensitive now, best we don't make our information public. We claim exceptional circumstances." and the bank-rollers of the project do what they've already done; say "OK" and roll over to have their tummies tickled.

(OK, so I'm the one following the cynics path - I standby awaiting a correction to my line....)

I found a 41 page memo here -

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default ... m09-21.pdf

Quoting from the first page:

Recipient reports required by Section 1512 of the Recovery Act will answer important questions, such as:
• Who is receiving Recovery Act dollars and in what amounts?
• What projects or activities are being funded with Recovery Act dollars?
• What is the completion status of such projects

That doesn't seem like very sensitive information, but that is only the first page and the memo goes on for 41 pages ...

Ivy Matt · Post by **Ivy Matt** » Sat Oct 09, 2010 5:50 pm

Here's a crazy idea, but somehow I think the folks at EMC2 have already thought of it: What would the penalties be if EMC2 suddenly released their late report now...and then waited another three months to release their next report?

choff · Post by **choff** » Sat Oct 09, 2010 6:32 pm

My understanding is that they deliver a monthly report on progress to the ONR. Final report April 2011 is only 6 months away, and since everyone has waited this long, why bug them this near the end.

You've heard of the 'want of a nail' story. If we get picky about reporting rules we could have a modern version.

For the want of a Recovery Project Tracking Report, a positive fusion research project final report was halted.
For the want of a positive research project final report, a double dip recession happened.
For the want of avoiding a double dip recession, a full blown market crash happened.
For the want of avoiding a full blown market crash, a 3rd world war happened.
For the want of avoiding a 3rd world war, an all out nuclear holocaust happened.
All for the want of a Recovery Project Tracking Report.

Seriously though, what if Nebel and Park were in the middle of some profound scientific insight when the phone rings and some bureaucrat yells at them about some sillya## report they need to file, and when they get off the phone the original chain of thought is lost for good.

What they really need is some giant dome over Santa Fe, like out of 'The Truman Show.'

chrismb · Post by **chrismb** » Sat Oct 09, 2010 6:51 pm

choff wrote:what if Nebel and Park were in the middle of some profound scientific insight when the phone rings and some bureaucrat yells at them about some sillya## report they need to file, and when they get off the phone the original chain of thought is lost for good.

..awwww!! sob story!! boo hoo

If so, then they'll just have to join all the other researchers who have been put in exactly the same situation... and who have had to deal with it.... [or not]

That's just the way of the wicked world. Maybe next time they'll sell shares to private investors so they can argue the toss with them, rather than take tax-payers' hard-earned who, quite rightly, have high demands on accountability.

..plenty of scientific work has been scuppered because those scientists do not have much capacity nor love of administration. Tough. Them's the rules. Live with it, or use your own money so no one's got any call on you.

choff · Post by **choff** » Sat Oct 09, 2010 7:57 pm

I would posit that considerably more of the taxpayers money has been spent on far more unscientific pursuits with total contempt for oversight. The amount of taxpayer money at risk with regard to EMC2 is minuscule in comparison to reward, and this really is a sillya## report they're being asked to waste their time filing.