If you are interested, look up the Project on Government Oversight.

Government contracting isn't really understood by a lot of people, the government can't just walk up to a company and say "we'll purchase this" and be done with it. Everything is a bid process, and a competitive range is set, a competitor is pulled from that for award. There are a lot of elements in the assessment, unless it's a no-bid contract which usually has some type of political influence involved.

Beyond that, here is one of the reasons why it's impossible to have a cost-effective government contract operation... It isn't a fully competitive environment. It is bound by those who know FAR and can provide the data that enables them to compete enough to end up in the range. Then, once in the range, they perform their cost-plus or whatever contractual obligation exists.

Once in place, particularly over in a combat theater, there is zero chance of poor performance leading to someone being pulled from an active environment but it's possible through a stop-work order and a bit of notice given to DODIG or GAO, it could typically take 30 or so days if a termination of cause is provided.

If it falls upon criminal negligence, the press is a fine place to go if following the chain of command doesn't work. Everyone in the government is beholden to the taxpayer.

Now, this isn't JUST a contractor issue in that there are government agents that should have been monitoring this and taking action. Because of the issue of putting people in harms way, I highly doubt a stop-work order would be issued.

Now, here is another sour pickle... The moment oversight is thrown into the mix, that person or entity is demonized because it slows down some activities. Slowing things down means you can't react as fast and that can sometimes lead to lives lost (even though no evidence will ever be found proving it, just a shit load of anecdote). You can't prove a negative.