AKAO 2017 Annual Report

62 The U.S. government will be able to terminate any of its contracts with us, either for convenience or if we default by failing to perform in accordance with or to achieve the milestones set forth in the contract schedules and terms. Termination-for-convenience provisions generally enable us to recover only our costs incurred or committed and settlement expenses on the work completed prior to termination. Except for the amount of services received by the government, termination-for-default provisions do not permit these recoveries and would make us liable for excess costs incurred by the U.S. government in procuring undelivered items from another source. The U.S. government’s determination to award a future contract or contract option may be challenged by an interested party, such as another bidder, at the U.S. Government Accountability Office (the “GAO”), or in federal court. If such a challenge is successful, our BARDA contracts or any future contract we may be awarded may be terminated. The laws and regulations governing the procurement of goods and services by the U.S. government provide procedures by which other bidders and interested parties may challenge the award of a government contract. If we are awarded a government contract, such challenges or protests could be filed even if there are not any valid legal grounds on which to base the protest. If any such protests are filed, the government agency may decide to suspend our performance under the contract while such protests are being considered by the GAO or the applicable federal court, thus potentially delaying delivery of payment. In addition, we could be forced to expend considerable funds to defend any potential award. If a protest is successful, the government may be ordered to terminate any one or more of our contracts and reselect bids. The government agencies with which we have contracts could even be directed to award a potential contract to one of the other bidders. Our business is subject to audit by the U.S. government and other potential sources for grant funding, including under our contracts with BARDA, NIAID and the Gates Foundation, and a negative outcome in an audit could adversely affect our business. U.S. government agencies such as the Department of Health and Human Services (“DHHS”) and the Defense Contract Audit Agency (the “DCAA”) routinely audit and investigate government contractors. These agencies review a contractor’s performance under its contracts, cost structure and compliance with applicable laws, regulations and standards. The DHHS and the DCAA also review the adequacy of, and a contractor’s compliance with, its internal control systems and policies, including the contractor’s purchasing, property, estimating, compensation and management information systems. Any costs found to be improperly allocated to a specific contract will not be paid, while such costs already paid must be refunded. If an audit uncovers improper or illegal activities, we may be subject to civil and criminal penalties and administrative sanctions, including: • termination of contracts; • forfeiture of profits; • suspension of payments; • fines; and • suspension or prohibition from conducting business with the U.S. government. In addition, we could suffer serious reputational harm if allegations of impropriety were made against us, which could cause our stock price to decrease. We have also agreed to allow the Gates Foundation to audit our compliance with using specified proceeds from the Gates Foundation only for certain mutually-agreed upon work.