Tomahawk

The CLIN clearly states FFP.

Would (should not) not the CLIN structure clearly state it what a T&M contract and not a Firm-fixed price?

Oh, I long ago got rid of that expectation. Hiring the expertise is the preferred method as "learning it yourself" is trap many SB's fall into. Do what you do well; hire the rest out. I am seeing it is quite difficult to hire an expert, at least in this case. You can't really compare the commercial word, where the seller gets to meet with the buyer to a situation where the CO on the government side is disconnected from not only the prospective vendor, but from their own end-user customer. Back in the day when contracting activities were less centralized your approach worked well, but now that situation has changed. I bolded your last comment because I couldn't agree more, but that is just much more difficult now.

My opinion was that it was poorly designed. Hence, why I came to the forum looking for expert help. The expectation is that the CO knows the rules better than we do, as that is their job day in and day out. That said, as business owners entering into a contract, we should do our due diligence beforehand to know what we agreeing to do.

This is an excellent topic.

I meant "private message".

I believe this will be acceptable.

Would a PM be acceptable?

The bold portion of your reply is my concern. First, let's be candid: everyone on the planet avoids T&M because of the huge accounting and tracking problems, both on the government and contractor side. Secondly, in our 20 years, we have never had any T&M contract, especially where there really is no "T". Billing is not an issue, but one risk I am seeing is to have to establish a different accounting structure for a bunch of cheap parts. Looking through the provisions more carefully, I did see where the government will pay "established catalog prices" so my intention is to establish a catalog. After all, these items aren't that numerous or expensive. I have no interest in selling the government a bunch of cheap parts and would be much happier if they would source the parts themselves, but it is a requirement and we will fulfill the obligation.

By the way, thank you all for replying!

They want the contractor to repair the equipment and if parts (material) are needed to sell them to the government with no markup, only "cost". I agree, I do not understand why the "time" is referenced as the "time" is already FFP.

I agree, time is of the essence. I will be asking questions of the KO, but I think the individual is in well over his head. I've been successfully responding to state and federal bids for 30 years, but this is a type of RFP I've not seen before.

That's pretty close to what it will be when it gets awarded. And to clarify, the FFP is for the service. They are requesting an FTE for services with 2080 hrs,FFP.

We received an RFP with a request for FFP labor rates for five years and ( I think) a time and material portion for materials ( parts) used in computer repair. It is a bit hard to follow, but the government has budgeted a set $ amount for parts per year and the ability to request more dollars if required. I have not seen a blended contract like this before. It literally says on the solicitation: Type of contract: 1. Firm-Fixed Price 2. Time and Material It is SB set-aside, if that is relevant. My question is: How difficult will this be to manage from an accounting standpoint?