Jump to content

dlgsharp

Members
  • Posts

    6
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

0 Neutral

About dlgsharp

  • Birthday 03/03/1978

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Los Angeles
  1. When I was researching the viability of FFP-LOE on commercial contracts I got a very different answer from Ask A Professor: https://dap.dau.mil/aap/pages/qdetails.aspx?cgiSubjectAreaID=21&cgiQuestionID=21407 Title - Can FFP-LOE be used for Commercial Contracts? Question - FAR 16.201 states that the PCO must use FFP (or fixed-price with economic price adjustment) contracts when acquiring commercial items. Is FFP-LOE considered a subset of FFP, and can it be used to acquire commercial services? Scenario - A requirement for an investigational study in the R&D arena has been determined to be appropriate for the Firm-Fixed-Price, Level of Effort (FFP-LOE) type contract. The research services have also been determined to be commercial in nature. Posted - 10/5/2007 12:00:00 AM Subject Area - Contracting - Commercial Updated 9/13/2012 Firm Fixed Price Level of Effort contracts are not allowed as a contract type for the acquisition of commercial items. According to FAR 12.207, the only contract types allowed are firm fixed price (FFP), Fixed Price with Economic Price Adjustment (FP-EPA), Time and Materials (T&M), Labor Hour (LH), IDIQ’s that are FFP, FP-EPA, T&M or LH. These contract types may have an award fee, performance incentive or delivery incentive as long as they are based solely on factors other than cost. You are specifically asking about Firm Fixed Price Level of Effort(FFPLOE) contracts. These types of contracts are not found on the list described in FAR 12.207. The confusion is whether or not FFPLOE contracts could fall under the category of FFP contracts. Although FFPLOE uses "firm fixed price" in its name, there are many differences between these two contract types. A FFP contract specifies a contractor output of an acceptable product or service as a condition for payment by the Gov’t. A FFPLOE contract only specifies the type of work the contractor must do in a specified period of time. The contractor does not have to deliver an acceptable product or service to get paid. Many experts would say that the FFPLOE is more like a Cost Reimbursement or Time and Materials contract than a Fixed Price contract. Because these two contract types (FFP/FFPLOE) are so significantly different, it is incorrect to assume that the FFPLOE is a type of FFP contract covered under the FFP category described at FAR 12.207 (a). If it were to be used as a contract type for the procurement of commercial items under FAR 12, it would have been specifically listed. In addition, I have talked to both the DFARS Council lawyer and the OSD Contracting Policy Office expert. They both feel certain that FFPLOE contracts were specifically not included in the FAR 12.207 list and thus are not eligible for the procurement of commercial items using FAR 12.
  2. Retreadfed, on 15 June 2011 - 01:48 PM said: What is the interplay between 242.7502(g) on the one hand and FAR 16.301-3(a)(3) and 9.104-1(e) on the other hand? Don Acquisition replied that there might not be an interplay. I would like to get some more thoughts on this matter. DFARS 242.7502(g), provides guidance on how to mitigate risk stemming from an accounting system deficiency. One of the alternatives is to pursue a different contract type. My assumption regarding this alternative is that you could avoid accounting system risk by using a FFP or Firm-Fixed-Price, Level-of-Effort Term Contract. Question 1: is this a good assumption? DFARS 242.7502(g) also suggests other alternatives, such as reducing the fee objective or using a re-opener. These alternatives suggest that you would award a cost contract in spite of an accounting system deficiency. Question 2: are these still viable courses of action if the contractor has a disapproved accounting system? FAR 16.301-3(a)(3) requires an adequate accounting system in order to enter into a cost reimbursable contract. Question 3: Could a contractor with a disapproved accounting system meet this requirement, assuming that the contractor has approved Corrective Action Plans and the government pursues some risk mitigation technique, per DFARS 242.7502(g)?
  3. I wanted to add to this discussion, but the topic was closed. I am in the process of applying to become a PCO in the Air Force, and I enthusiastically support the written standardized exam as it is implemented where I work. A few observations... 1. The exam is the first step of a three step process. First, you must pass the computerized exam. Second, you must pass an interview consisting of 20-30 minutes of management/supervision/leadership oriented questions and 20-30 minutes of PCO knowledge scenario questions. Third, you must pass a Contracting Officer Review Board that consists of 45-60 minutes of PCO knowledge scenario questions. 2. The standardized exam does a good job of separating serious PCO candidates from unserious or unprepared candidates. The exam is by no means a perfect judge of what it takes to become a CO, but it does a good job at setting the minimum qualifications point. I know of several people that have not been able to pass the exam, and I don't think these people are ready to become PCOs. The exam is a fair and efficient way to inform an aspiring candidate that they are not quite ready yet. 3. Getting 85% correct is not nearly as easy as it sounds. The exam is 50 questions long and 100 points are possible. 2 points for every question with the correct multiple choice answer and the EXACTLY correct citation. 1 point per question for the correct multiple choice answer but not the EXACTLY correct citation. 0 points per question for the incorrect multiple choice answer regardless of citation accuracty (misinterpreting the citation is not rewarded). Getting each question right is relatively easy. Getting the exact perfect FAR/DFARS/AFFARS citation with ~5 minutes per question to research it is not that easy. At the very least it takes practice using FAR Search and Google to increase your research efficiency. 4. The fact that the test forces people to get better at searching the FAR quickly and accurately is a good thing, IMO. Regards, Dave Sharp
  4. Thank you both for thoroughly answering my questions.
  5. Thanks Vern for such a speedy reply! Would the answers change if it was a level of effort service?
  6. What are the consequences of not extending the Period of Performance before it expires? Likewise, what are the consequences of not moving out a delivery date before it passes? Is there a critical distinction between level of effort services and supplies? Background: I am working on a modification to a CPAF delivery order for the purchase of a system. The bilateral modification will change a specification, requiring additional effort to be performed. Both the contractor and the government realize that this will take more time, and thus the delivery date needs to be pushed out. My questions... 1. If the current delivery date is 1 June 2009, is it a problem if the modification is not put on contract until 8 June 2009? 2. Assuming that the contractor has plenty of funding, does he need to stop work after 1 June? 3. Can the parties agree that the modification?s effective date is 1 June 2009 (my reading of FAR 43.101(a) says they can, but Vern taught me never to trust the FAR at face value)? 3. a. Is that even necessary? 4. Can the Government direct the contractor to continue working from June 2 through June 7?
×
×
  • Create New...