Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs

govtacct02

Members
  • Content count

    68
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by govtacct02

  1. A CPFF subcontract (not construction) is being closed out (we are the sub) and we need to understand what the order of preference is : PO or subcontract document, with regard to period of performance. There is nothing in the subcontract to state order of precedence. The PO indicates the extended period of performance, and it added value to the subcontract. The subcontract was not modified when the PO was modified. Thanks.
  2. A few years ago, the responsibility for determining adequacy of a Contractor's CAS Disclosure Statement transitioned from DCAA to DCMA. Prior to that, when DCAA would review for adequacy, they followed a checklist of sorts to review the form part( vs. the Continuation Sheets) that contractors also found helpful. It is no longer in the DCAM, and I can't find something like it in DCMA instructions. Does anyone have an old copy of this tool that they would be willing to share? I am trying to use it for training purposes. Thanks.
  3. You might want to read the Sikorsky COFC case on CAS 418 - selection of an allocation base for material handling that involved government property ($0 value on the books) was part of the debate. No. 09-844 ¶¶ 45-50; Sikorsky Aircraft Corp. v. United States, 105 Fed. Cl. 657, 674 (2012) (“Sikorsky II”)
  4. As a follow up - my local DCMA office provided the adequacy review program, that includes conformity. If you need it, you can ask your DCMA, who now has disclosure statement adequacy determination responsibility that DCAA once had.
  5. I am not a DCAA auditor. So srterral, I won't be able to take you up on your offer. Thank you anyhow. Joan - I do not see the term "conformity" in DCMA Instructions on CAS Compliance...or in Policy 120. Can you provide a more specific link? Thanks.
  6. Just curious - what do other contractors do when you are supporting an audit of a TINA-covered proposal and the auditor says you have to transmit actuals to them in their format, vs. the contractor's format, where there were no specific instructions in the solicitation to submit in a Government or Prime contractor specific format?
  7. Auditor's Format

    This is one that is under the purview of the DCMA to review due to dollar value, so it is a DCMA analysis of a proposal.
  8. Auditor's Format

    Yes, and I also looked at the DFARs PGI 215.404-1 Proposal analysis techniques, (c )(iii). This is a cost monitor requesting we reformat the actuals into a specific cost monitor workpaper format during a proposal audit, and there are no specific instructions in the solicitation as to how to format to respond to audit questions. My thoughts are that nowadays it is not such a good idea to push back.
  9. Are you intending on claiming the executives' salaries in allocations to Government contracts/subcontracts?
  10. The FAR material cost principle states at 31.205-26 (e) "Allowance for all materials, supplies, and services that are sold or transferred between any divisions, subdivisions, subsidiaries, or affiliates of the contractor under a common control shall be on the basis of cost incurred in accordance with this subpart." Hypothetical situation: Let's assume that there is work being performed by a sister unit for your company (separate CAS Segment), who is an affiliate under common control. The affiliate does not qualify to be able to transfer costs at price. Let's say for financial measurement purposes, you contracted for the work to be done by this affiliiate on a FFP basis. Your prime contract is CPFF, so the prime contract has the Allowable Cost & Payment clause. Therefore, you have to submit and certify final indirect rates. Let's say the affiliate's cost is part of an allocation base for an indirect rate of yours. If the affiliate otherwise has no requirement to submit final indirect rates (no flexibly priced business), would they have to operate (for your sake) as if they were covered by the Allowable Cost & Payment clause (even though this is a FFP arrangement) and adjust their billings or memo entry their costs to you on an allowable actual costs incurred basis because of the fact that you have a CPFF contract and the above stated cost principle is in effect in your prime contract? Would you include their actual costs incurred (both allowable & unallowable) in the allocation base for the indirect rate as mentioned above, or their FFP billings to you? Thanks for your help.
  11. Please help me resolve some confusion on my part with regard to when subcontractor cost or pricing data is required to be submitted with a prime contract proposal. For illustration purposes, the prospective subcontractor would be covered by TINA. I am looking at FAR 15.403-4 and FAR Table 15.2. FAR 15.403-4 ( c ) states "Any contractor or subcontractor that is required to submit cost or pricing data also shall obtain and analyze cost or pricing data before awarding any subcontract, purchase order, or modification expected to exceed the cost or pricing data threshold, unless an exception in 15.403-1( b ) applies to that action. (1) The contractor shall submit, or cause to be submitted by the subcontractor(s), cost or pricing data to the Government for subcontracts that are the lower of either -- (i) $11.5 million or more; or (ii) Both more than the pertinent cost or pricing data threshold and more than 10 percent of the prime contractor?s proposed price, unless the contracting officer believes such submission is unnecessary. (2) The contracting officer may require the contractor or subcontractor to submit to the Government (or cause submission of) subcontractor cost or pricing data below the thresholds in paragraph ( c )(1) of this subsection that the contracting officer considers necessary for adequately pricing the prime contract." FAR Table 15-2 , para. IIA States "Conduct price analyses of all subcontractor proposals. Conduct cost analyses for all subcontracts when cost or pricing data are submitted by the subcontractor. Include these analyses as part of your own cost or pricing data submissions for subcontracts expected to exceed the appropriate threshold in FAR 15.403-4. Submit the subcontractor cost or pricing data as part of your own cost or pricing data as required in paragraph IIA(2) of this table. II(A) (2) All Other. Obtain cost or pricing data from prospective sources for those acquisitions (such as subcontracts, purchase orders, material order, etc.) exceeding the threshold set forth in FAR 15.403-4 and not otherwise exempt, in accordance with FAR 15.403-1( b ) (i.e., adequate price competition, commercial items, prices set by law or regulation or waiver). Also provide data showing the basis for establishing source and reasonableness of price. In addition, provide a summary of your cost analysis and a copy of cost or pricing data submitted by the prospective source in support of each subcontract, or purchase order that is the lower of either $11.5 million or more, or both more than the pertinent cost or pricing data threshold and more than 10 percent of the prime contractor?s proposed price." My question: Is Paragraph II(A)(2) of Table 15.2 consistent with 15.403-4 ( c ) in saying that you are only required to submit with your proposal summaries of cost analysis and a copy of cost or pricing data submitted by the prospective source in support of each subcontract, or purchase order that is the lower of either $11.5 million or more, or both more than the pertinent cost or pricing data threshold and more than 10 percent of the prime contractor?s proposed price - and there is not a requirement to submit cost or price analysis for every single subcontractor that is over $650,000 and not otherwise exempt from TINA? (provided that the CO does not require you to submit cost or pricing data below the threshold in 15.403-4 ( c ) (1) as described in 15.403-4 ( c ) (2)) Thanks.
  12. Has anyone had experience with a having to determine 'adequate consideration' under FAR 32.005, when the change involved only a change in non-commercial item contract financing terms? (Presume no other changes are being made.) As I read FAR 32, it seems like determining adequate consideration is somewhat of an art. Would the contractor have to provide a FAR-15 compliant proposal in order for the CO to determine whether the consideration was "adequate"? Thanks.
  13. Contract Financing Change - Consideration

    Appreciate everyone's input. Here are some answers: Can’t tell if the change you reference is with regard to a proposal on a not yet awarded contract or an existing contract. This is an existing contract. Are you asking because the FAR Part 15 reference is directed toward issues of certified cost or pricing data? Yes. Question is regarding disclosure requirements when financing is only element changed. Base contract was competitively awarded. Is the CO directing the change to the financing or is the contractor simply requesting for some reason? Contractor is requesting it. You have not identified the contract financing that is being changed and to what. Different financing or none at all? It would involve acceleration to payment schedule. If a current contract what stage, in general terms, is the contract in currently? It is a few months into a 4 year period of performance. Knowing a little more about the above may help with a more specific response but quick thought is if the reference to FAR Part 15 is not connected to matters of cost or pricing data then I would submit yes it porbably is an art specific to the contract at had in that it is a proposal to change the contract and that adequate information specific to the contract would be shared to evaluate the consideration be contemplated. That is what my initial thoughts were. But would like some feedback, understanding that it is not Legal Advice.
  14. Happy Birthday, Bob!

    Happy Belated Birthday Bob! Thank you for all you do to provide this valuable resource ! Hope it was a good day!
  15. SpartanHead, I would add to the previous comments that since you are new to your company, you could benefit from an appointment with your Government Accounting department. They can explain the cost structure, the burdening sequence, and alert you with any other items that are pertinent to your position there. I always make a point to spend time with new people and provide them with all the tools they need to be compliant!
  16. The question I have is: As a contractor, can the SOFARS solicitation provision 5652.215-9011 compel me to submit a DD Form 1547 "Record of Weighted Guidelines Method Application" with my proposal to the buying command? I am having trouble reconciling this with the prohibition in FAR 15.404-(c )(5) from obtaining breakouts or supporting rationale for [a prospective contractor's] profit or fee objective. Thank you. An editable SOFARS provision reads as follows: 5652.215-9011 Proposed Profit/Fee (2005) Section L As prescribed in 5615.408®, insert the following provision, Editable Offerors are encouraged to submit a completed DD Form 1547 "Record of Weighted Guidelines Method Application" to support the proposed profit in accordance with DFARS 215.404-71. The DD Form 1547 and supporting documentation are/are not required. If submitted, the DD Form 1547 and supporting documentation shall be included in the cost volume of the proposal. The solicitation we received highlights "are required". 15.404-4 -- Profit stipulates: (c )Contracting officer responsibilities. (5)The contracting officer shall not require any prospective contractor to submit breakouts or supporting rationale for its profit or fee objective but may consider it, if it is submitted voluntarily.
  17. What are you listening to?

    Fitz and the Tantrums - a little poppy but catchy - sounds a bit like a cross between Hall & Oates, classic Motown, and The Style Council. Anything by Pat Metheny Flamenco guitar (Ottmar Liebert, Strunz & Farah, Jesse Cook,et al), bossa nova (Getz/Jobim/Gilberto), or afro-cuban (Buena Vista Social club, et al)
  18. My company has foreign affiliates (Poland) that will have to have training on FAR Cost Principles. Is anyone aware of a resource (besides a foreign based branch of a U.S. consulting/audit firm to obtain the FAR in Polish?
  19. Time-and-Materials Payments

    Please see the Wifcon Thread at the URL below. This should help. http://www.wifcon.com/arc/forum410.htm In this thread, Vern said: "The T&M payment clause, FAR ? 52.232-7, paragraph (a), is very clear that if the contractor devoted a direct labor hour to the performance of the contract work, then it is entitled to payment at the hourly rate stipulated in the contract schedule. The clause does not condition payment on what the contractor paid or did not pay the employee who did the work. Under a T&M contract, payment for labor is not based upon incurred cost."
  20. Service Contract Act OCONUS

    Please see the DOL website for FAQ's about the SCA applicability. http://www.dol.gov/whd/regs/compliance/web/SCA_FAQ.htm
  21. ???????? Summit

    Edit: If they want to pay for advertising, they know how. Bob Antonio
  22. 10 U.S.C. 2306( d ) and 41 U.S.C. 254( B ) impose statutory limitations of 15% for fee on experimental, developmental, or research work performed under a cost-plus-fixed-fee contract. I work for a government contractor, and have been asked whether a CPFF supplies and services contract that includes development activities must be funded with RDT&E funds (for the development activities) to permit proposing fee in excess of 10% on those development activities. Thanks for your help.
  23. Wifcon.com Begins Its 14th Year

    Bob, I don't know what I would do without WIFCON. I visit your site several times a day. You've put a tremendous amount of work and meticulous care into this site, and it is an excellent, excellent resource. It is on my list of "must use' websites. I advertise it to my coworkers and fellow industry association members as often as I can. I'll echo the other members who say WIFCON has contributed substantially to my understanding of so many contracting issues. And I will pray for your health, too! Thanks Bob.
×