Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs

PepeTheFrog

Members
  • Content count

    217
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About PepeTheFrog

  • Rank
    Bronze Member

Recent Profile Visitors

3,076 profile views
  1. Significant Government Delays and DFAS Payment Issues

    Be careful with option 2. This is a common and reasonable (for the private sector) suggestions, but there is a problem with applying it to federal contracts. If you threaten to stop work, you can be terminated for default under the theory that you provided notice of anticipatory breach. That's jargon for "The government can ruin your reputation by saying you broke the contract, based on the fact that you threatened to stop work."
  2. BANNED! Again...

    Well, that escalated quickly
  3. Accountability Might Need a New Name

    PepeTheFrog thinks this method of transparency and accountability is a fantastic idea. Reality check: DoD and Intelligence will claim "national security implications" to avoid using blockchain accounting. The real reason will be (a) some actual national security implications for a very small amount of the spending and (b) a convenient excuse to avoid accountability for the gigantic remainder. Congress and its constituents might really like this idea because it will put tighter strings on the appropriations. Hopefully, Congress will legislate a requirement to use this method if it is proven to be secure, reliable, and useful in a few test cases. One day before September 11, 2001, SECDEF Donald Rumsfeld announced the Pentagon cannot track $2.3 trillion of transactions, supposedly due to outdated and incompatible systems.
  4. NDAA for FY 2018

    There are multiple people sitting on FAR and DFARS revision teams who are functionally illiterate, and are not equipped to make complex decisions that affect thousands of people and billions of dollars. It's absurd. PepeTheFrog thinks that some of this subset are dumped into this extremely important role only because their larger office doesn't think it's important and wants to save their best brains for operational contracting work. None of this subset would have a high paying federal job, let alone a seat on these councils or teams, if America re-instituted the civil service exam. Hundreds of years ago, the Chinese introduced a revolutionary idea for civil service competency, meritocracy, and inclusiveness: use the "imperial exam" (the first civil service exam) to screen and select future Mandarins. The poorest rice farmer, with no political connections, from a backwater province, could eventually advise the highest levels of leadership-- if he was gifted and could prove his intelligence, knowledge, and skills in an objective test. A major step forward for civilization and government. What does America do? Gets rid of this test, ironically, in the spirit of "inclusiveness." Where is Orwell? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_examination Edited to add Chinese history.
  5. Ethics and Transparency

    Leave, ASAP. Intuition is a very powerful and very important human sense that has developed over a long period of time.
  6. Privatization

    Thanks, @REA'n Maker. PepeTheFrog enjoyed that Guardian article, but there is zero chance she will read the author's book. from the Guardian article: "For now, it is best to remember (and remind others) that bureaucracy was never a swamp but rather a deep reservoir of talented, loyal, and devoted experts, whose effectiveness turned in considerable part on their political independence." PepeTheFrog fears the author actually believes the nonsense written in the article. "deep reservoir of talented, loyal, and devoted experts" So talented that they had to ditch the Civil Service Exam. The author might be fondly remembering the bureaucracy prior to the 1970s. So devoted that you can be trampled while standing in the lobby of any federal building during the stampeding waves at 3:00, 3:30, 4:00, and 4:30. So expert that industry recruiters and hiring managers know to be prejudiced against anyone who sticks around longer than a decade. "All of a sudden, we’re no longer primed to think of federal employees as lazy and lackluster, an all-too-frequent characterization in the 1980s, 1990s, and 2000s...Now we think of them as stellar scientists, lawyers, and diplomats—the very best this country has to offer" Uhh, who do you mean "we," Kemo Sabe? "political independence" Federal bureaucrats are aligned with the political party which fills and protects the food bowl of federal jobs and the bureaucracy. This keeps federal bureaucrats dependent, politically. In the 2016 election, 95% of donations from federal employees went to one political party (Justice: 99%;State: 99%; IRS: 94%). The author is clearly suffering from an acute case of T.D.S., which is fogging his brain, and likely believes that only businessmen are subject to the weaknesses of human nature. In his secular religion, academics, bureaucrats, and others who extract resources from productive citizens have achieved apotheosis by vocation and political alignment.
  7. Progress Payments by CLIN

    You're most welcome, and thank you. PepeTheFrog, as a side-armed and self-deputized member of the Neighborhood Watch, always shares information with the local Deviation Patrol. If you see something, say something. Deviation Patrol lives matter! They're the thin redlined contract that keeps scriveners safe from the savages.
  8. Progress Payments by CLIN

    @Don Mansfield PepeTheFrog is alerting the Deviation Patrol! Is this a deviation?
  9. Thanks, Vern. PepeTheFrog cannot prove that assertion with hard evidence or statistics. It comes from personal experience, observations, and conversations with a wide range of 1102s and contractors. The federal government hates labor hours (LH) contracts because they're not willing to admit that they did a poor job of monitoring and administering LH contracts. LH contracts are common across the globe and throughout history. Sometimes you want to buy somebody's time. To avoid the hassle and scrutiny, 1102s "cheat" by using FFP-LOE, billed monthly, pro rata, based on hours. So, they have something similar to a LH contract but called FFP-LOE. (The contractor bills the government each month for X hours worked that month, which creates a sort of "hourly rate," instead of billing the government for a uniform monthly fraction of the FFP-LOE contract price.) Clueless, indifferent, or complicit 1102 management is fine with it. PepeTheFrog isn't saying this is a good practice, just calling attention to it. In fact, PepeTheFrog remembers a few WIFCON threads and articles where Vern and others have described the important differences between the inspection, acceptance, and payment clauses for FFP-LOE vs. LH vs. other "types" of contracts, e.g. "Contract Pricing Arrangements: A Primer" from Briefing Papers circa 2009. PepeTheFrog thinks that many of these 1102s who "cheat" with this method do not know about the important differences.
  10. For the record, PepeTheFrog is a carnivorous, apex predator who eats members of the senior executive service for breakfast. PepeTheFrog has to agree with FrankJon in practice because the theory went totally out the window. FFP-LOE is the new labor hours-- meaning, the government often uses FFP-LOE when they want labor hours but can't get approval.
  11. FrankJon, PepeTheFrog understands your viewpoint now. Thank you for clarifying. PepeTheFrog only thinks that it "might be" a stupid decision to use FFP to purchase a set number of hours, if the better solution is to use FFP to purchase a deliverable, result, or defined service or if the better solution is to use a different contract "type" to actually purchase a set number of hours. PepeTheFrog agrees that often the government uses FFP to dust chairs using contractor personnel. PepeTheFrog wonders if these government employees are deeply comforted by seeing contractor personnel every day, in the same office. Maybe they are just lonely and want some company?
  12. Is it there? Is it where? While you eat your green eggs and ham, these are the only reasons you should care: Is it in the solicitation? Is it in the contract? Is it in the FAR? (Is it also included in the solicitation or contract?) Is it in your agency's FAR supplement(s)? (Is it also included in the solicitation or contract?)
  13. PepeTheFrog thinks FrankJon knows the answer to this question, and FrankJon is just being coy, but PepeTheFrog will hop in. The delivery, inspection, acceptance, and payment terms and clauses of FFP contracts are not designed with the intent of purchasing a set number of hours. You could do that, but it might be a stupid decision. There are other types of contractual delivery, inspection, acceptance, and payment terms and clauses that are more appropriate for purchasing 1,880 hours of somebody's time. FrankJon, can you think of a more appropriate "type" of contract for purchasing 1,880 hours of someone's time?
  14. Where/ How to start learning?

    You're in the right place. Reading as much of this discussion forum (and website) as possible will be very helpful. You might try reading your subcontracts line by line, and tracing the flowdown clauses back to the FAR or DFARS. National Contract Management Association (NCMA) is a helpful group to join and they offer a monthly journal which is worth the price of membership.
  15. :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:
×