PTSD Combat is no longer being updated.

Find Ilona blogging at Magyar Etimológia and Etymartist.

Thursday, March 29, 2007

IG Report: Veterans Administration Lax in Implementing Database Security Measures

The issue of data secuity at the VA has a direct bearing on the ability of troops to work past the stigma of coming forward for mental health care. If a vet worries about the possibility of his confidential files being breached, they may not be nearly as open to seeking the help they need for worry that their privacy may be invaded. And so, the latest news out of the VA is not heartening.

From the Associated Press:

Veterans Affairs officials wasted millions on a $100 million computer security contract that became a virtual "open checkbook" because of poor oversight and sloppy management, an internal review says. The audit by the VA inspector general brings renewed attention to problems of data security and contract management after the department sustained blistering criticism for its loss of nearly 26.5 million veterans' sensitive personal information last May. ...

In recent weeks, VA officials have faced a fresh round of bipartisan criticism over data security, with auditors telling Congress that gaping holes persist and that most VA data remains unencrypted. At a hearing last month, Maureen Regan, counselor to the VA inspector general, said the department still hasn't fully implemented any of its recommendations from reports dating back to 2001.

The department also hasn't adopted five key recommendations issued shortly after the massive data breach last May involving veterans.

Click on 'Article Link' below tags for more...


According to the findings, the VA:

—Spent more than $35 million for equipment and supplies under the contract that it cannot account for.

—Hastily increased the scope of the contract several times, bringing the total value of the contract from $102.8 million to $250 million with little thought or oversight. "This made the contract an open checkbook ... with little assurance of price reasonableness and no planned funding."

—Did not ensure that the joint venture, VAST, met requirements to qualify as a small business.

—Made overpayments on the contract as high as $8.5 million.

—Did not conduct required background investigations on the contract employees.

 Related Posts

Blog Widget by LinkWithin
Want to stay connected? You can subscribe to PTSD Combat via Feedburner or follow Ilona on Twitter.
Later/Newer Posts Previous/Older Posts Return Home

2011: Jan Feb
2010: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec
2009: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec
2008: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec
2007: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec
2006: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec
2005: Sept Oct Nov Dec

Legal Notice

The information presented on this web site is based on news reports, medical and government documents, and personal analysis. It does NOT represent therapeutic prescription or recommendation. For specific advice and information, consult your health care provider.

Comments at PTSD Combat do not necessarily represent the editor's views. Illegal or inappropriate material will be removed when brought to our attention. The existence of such does not reflect an endorsement.

This site contains at times large portions of copyrighted material not specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This material is used for educational purposes, to forward understanding of issues that concern veterans and military families. In accordance with U.S. Copyright Law Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit. More information.