Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by marcfgov

  1. Here_2_Help and Retreadfed, Thank you, I appreciate you taking the time to respond! Sorry for the delay, I had "notify me of replies" off. Here_2_help, I agree with you on the what the "FAR means". I feel like a dog chasing its tail! I love the story of the thermal ink! Can you imagine the look on the Auditors face! Retreadfed, thank you for pointing me to CAM: 3-204.21 Contractors Use of Scanned Images. This of course references (a) FAR 4.703(c)-1,2 and 3; (d) and (e). (e) is where it gets interesting. . . e) If we have not tested the contractor’s scanned images, auditors should determine if the contractor has preserved the original documents. If the original documents were preserved, auditors should test a sample of scanned documents to original documents to determine reliability. If the contractor did not preserve the original documents, auditors must consider the contractor’s environment and review the permanent files for risk factors to ensure there is no obvious reason we should not rely on the scanned documents. Assuming no significant risk factors are identified, the auditor should complete the assignment with the scanned images, and determine if there is an impact on the audit opinion. So if policies and procedures are being followed, controlled environment, checks and balances, approvals, etc. then there would be minimal risk and the scanned image should be acceptable. I can refer to the contractor's environment as a basis. It not, we will just say the originals are all in thermal ink or how about classified and printed in disappearing ink! Again, thank you both for your guidance, greatly appreciated! Marc
  2. Hi, With the increase in online T&E solutions, has DCAA established additional guideline related to Original Receipts vs. scanned and digital copies, etc. My question is related to 4.703.(c).3 (see below) "The contractor or subcontractor retains the original records for a minimum of one year after imaging to permit periodic validation of the imaging systems." I have delved deep into the internet and have found no guidance. If we meet (c) 1 and 2 then 3. defeats the purpose of reduction of paperwork, time for scanning and maintaining originals, etc. I have been through DCAA audits where the scanned document was accepted because of policies, procedures, internal audit, approvals, etc. were followed. If a company has an expense policy that covers the process, will DCAA waive 3? If DCAA doesn't accept a scan or electronic copy as "original" why should a company use one of the new online T&E services? Thoughts? As always, thank you for your review, input and guidance Marc 4.703.. . . (c) Nothing in this section shall be construed to preclude a contractor from duplicating or storing original records in electronic form unless they contain significant information not shown on the record copy. Original records need not be maintained or produced in an audit if the contractor or subcontractor provides photographic or electronic images of the original records and meets the following requirements: (1) The contractor or subcontractor has established procedures to ensure that the imaging process preserves accurate images of the original records, including signatures and other written or graphic images, and that the imaging process is reliable and secure so as to maintain the integrity of the records. (2) The contractor or subcontractor maintains an effective indexing system to permit timely and convenient access to the imaged records. (3) The contractor or subcontractor retains the original records for a minimum of one year after imaging to permit periodic validation of the imaging systems. (d) If the information described in paragraph (a) of this section is maintained on a computer, contractors shall retain the computer data on a reliable medium for the time periods prescribed. Contractors may transfer computer data in machine readable form from one reliable computer medium to another. Contractors’ computer data retention and transfer procedures shall maintain the integrity, reliability, and security of the original computer data. Contractors shall also retain an audit trail describing the data transfer. For the record retention time periods prescribed, contractors shall not destroy, discard, delete, or write over such computer data.
  3. Vern, Here_to_Help, et.al., (Please read) OK, so it appears that I did make a "newbie" mistake. The internet is a wonderful tool, but you only get a response to "what you ask", and it clouds out everything else and my question was "confusing" my searches. I completely skipped the one authoritative document, the FAR, for my search and well DUH, I "missed the forest for the trees." Gosh, I do feel stupid; boy those crow feathers are hard to get down! (no, really). With that over with, this contract was novated in an acquisition, during the novation process, it changed from a CPFF to a T&M and in re-writing the contract, the handling of OT was completely left out. All our T&M contracts include the clause. MOD was completed before the novation; we completely missed it, assuming that it included the language for the handling of OT. Gentlemen, yes 52.232-7, (a), (8) plainly lays out the obvious and specifical answer to my question. "(8) Unless the Schedule prescribes otherwise, the hourly rates in the Schedule shall not be varied by virtue of the Contractor having performed work on an overtime basis. If no overtime rates are provided in the Schedule and overtime work is approved in advance by the Contracting Officer, overtime rates shall be negotiated. Failure to agree upon these overtime rates shall be treated as a dispute under the Disputes clause of this contract. If the Schedule provides rates for overtime, the premium portion of those rates will be reimbursable only to the extent the overtime is approved by the Contracting Officer." So, thank you "Gods of wisdom and guidance in all things GovCon" (I am not being a smart @%#.). You provided an answer and guided me back on track to where I should be researching. I think the response to my boss is simple unless we request a MOD to include OT rate, we can only bill the Scheduled rates for hours performed (following any additional guidelines). Again, please forgive my last "emotional outburst" email. It was out of character for me, and disrespectful of the time and patience you took to answer my question. As always thank you, Humbly, Mark
  4. I’m sorry I over reacted. After further review, I took things too literally. You all are have always been here to help. I really couldn’t find anything and was frustrated , as always you all did provide the guidance I was looking for. Looking for a “mulligan”, ok?
  5. Thank you for your responses. I’ve come here for assistance four times since I became a member of this group in 2010. I am a faithful follower of the topics and posts. I researched and went through the blogs before I posted my question. And I read and respect all the answers and guidance. Yes, some of the copy and paste came from the post I found on this site from 2002. I apologize if I came off as a newbie, ignorant or lazy by asking if there was clarification from the 2002 post . I’ve read the contract, as I do before I ask for help I acknowledge that what I dont know is encyclopedic . Vern,you have always been gracious in providing guidance. Based on my interpretation of your guidance, I’m going with the fact that this is a T&M contract, bill for hours worked ,do not bill the time 1/2 also, based on the responses, I believe that my question irritated more than intrigued an answer. Again for that I apologize again. I will move on. I promise no more questions from me. As for the true newbies, please be a little less harsh and provide guidance vs assuming the are lazy and are just looking for an answer Some are, but like me back in 2010 I was here to learn Not a newbie, respectfully submitted, Mark
  6. This topic was discussed back in 2002! I am wondering if anyone has more current data. My company has a T&M contract with the Federal Government to provide information technology services and an issue has come up regarding the use of exempt (salaried) personnel, the hours they work, and how those hours are billed. All of the personnel performing under the contract are exempt from the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and routinely work more hours than what would be considered a typical workday (8 hours). Since our employees are exempt from FLSA, they do not receive additional compensation for the extra hours that they work. In accordance with DCAA guidance, our employees record all hours worked on their timesheets. Our prime contractor reached out today and they suggested that there’s no FAR that allows for us charging time & half for overtime pay for non-exempt employees. Instead, he suggested that overtime premium needs to be baked into our T&M bill rates and not show up as a separate 1.5 X standard pay rate. I tend to agree, but my CEO has a different take! No Costs/No Billings, but the costs are not unallowable and we could record them to OH Rate. CEO's stance is that under a T&M contract we can bill the government for all hours worked in direct support of the contract (within the stated ceiling price, of course), regardless of whether any extra hours worked results in increased costs to the company or not. Our customer’s view is that since we are not incurring additional costs as a result of the extra hours worked by exempt personnel, we should cap our billings at the number of full-time hours available in a given billing period. A simple example for a one-person contract: if the month of June ’18 has 160 full-time hours available (20 business days x 8 hours/day) and our employee ends up working 200 hours (20 business days x 10 hours/day), our customer wants us to cap our billing at 160 hours. He says were entitled to 200 hours, given the nature of a T&M contract (it purchase hours worked, not costs incurred). They say they’ll reject the invoice if it’s for more than 160 hours. Again, I tend to agree, but any words as to the best way to handle this situation so I don't GET FIRED? (not really, but any assistance would be appreciated). Thanks, Mark
  7. Thank you. That also makes sense. We have not had to provide any type of cost analysis at this point in the company's history. We only had to prove commerciality for the original GSA pricing (many years ago). The remainder of the awards have been competitive FFP. We are looking to expand and that is the push to move towards a compliant system and all that accompany it.
  8. Thank you for your reply! Very Helpful in framing my thoughts. As for the "withoug change it practices and approach" that is what I am here to do. Using Deltek, setting up pools, policies and procedures, etc. This question is just the band-aide as we are moving forward toward bigger and better things! As GSA has moved more to the cost based pricing, this company has been "forced" to move away from commerciality and focus more on a bottoms up approach. Again, thank you all for your help and support. This is be best resource!
  9. Oh Masters of the Government Contracting Universe, Me again! I am with a new company, we do not have CPFF contracts (we do have FFP and T&M from GSA FABS/MOBIS schedules). Are we able to team with an Prime on a CPFF contract? Does CPFF always flow down to the sub? Just checking as I see opps that we can’t prime, but we could provide the services as a sub. I believe I can bid FFP CLINS and T&M CLINS using my GSA pricing, but as we grow, I am worried about flowdown clauses. My understanding is that whether we (as a sub) are exempt from CAS or is based on our specific situation, not the Prime’s. CAS does have mandatory flowdowns provisions, but in order to claim CAS exemption, all we have to do is show that we qualify, on our own, for a valid exemption. Saying that, we claiming exempt from CAS at this time. The GSA schedule pricing was not Cost Base, but Commerciality Based (which was approved years ago and we are not moving towards cost based). Thoughts?
  10. Hello GURU's Been a while since I have been on. We are having to take out a loan to cover short-term working capital. Let's say $2.0M with loan origination fees of 0.5%. It is a two year loan. I know that I can amortize the cost over the two years, and because it is in the normal course of business and reasonable, yada, yada, I believe that the fee is allowable. Saying that, can I just expense at close and cover it in "fees" (this is not prepaid interest, it is the closing costs, legal, documentation, etc.) Thanks, Marc
  11. Every time I ask a question here, I realize that what I don't know is encyclopedic! How do you know all this stuff! In any case, thank you all for your insight and taking time to answer. We'll eat the burdended costs. Charge it to a nonbillable, unallowable charge number against the profit on this contract. I'll talk to the PM's an make sure that we discuss the issues that are brought up here. Thanks again, Mark
  12. Thank you gang! I know it was a little unclear "babble", so to speak!, but you got me focused! I have a program manager on-site, the customer asked him a question not specifically related to the current cost objective, a little out of the scope, but in the same area (program for one system vs another system). The answer took him considerably longer than he anticipated (20hours) and he wanted to know where to charge his time. From my perspective, PM overhead, he didn't want to charge his contract and change a bid & proposal charge number (not really potential new work). He just needs to be careful on what tasks he takes up that are not on the statement of work. A little scope creep is OK, a lot (on a FFP) eats into the margin. Thanks again. Best Regards, Mark
  13. Where do we draw the line between what is Business Development and what is Overhead when it comes to potential new work. I have a program manager working on a question from the customer, it's an ECP, so that can go as bid/proposal work against the existing contract. For the 'information' that is being requested for another system, I'm not sure exactly what will come of it (as in New Contract, CLIN, Delivery Order or nothing). Typically, we get a request for proposal, not a request for information. My suspicion is that it will end up being an ECP, but what if they change their mind and don't go through with it? At this point, it seemed more like a Business Development activity than an actual technical / contractual activity. But, perhaps I'm wrong. Where is that lne between support of the contract and working towards additional work? And is working towards that additional work (on the same contract) just OH or BD? Thanks,
  14. Oh MAN, ALL, YOU ARE THE BEST yes, (all of you)! I know it should be straight forward, but sometimes I get "wrapped around the axle". Yes, I was looking for direction on what "flavor" CAS, and I think that I am going to get the FULL Monty! You also hit on my research topic for tomorrow, Disclosure Statement NOW or interim exemption. We are getting the contract novated from another company that we are a minority owner. So I am preparing for the immediate burden of requirements! I am going to start the preparation now. I have the accounting system, timekeeping and expense reporting, but we are essentially starting from scratch. Just set up an SSA (now that was fun and exciting!). Yes, we set up an SSA without purchasing a company! So now I have the SSA shell and am ready to populate with contracts! In the future, I will use the tems below "relevant, but not ultimately determinative, irrelevant", etc. to explain my position! I have been on this forum for a while and no joke, I truly appreciate the insight and guidance from everyone! Thanks for taking the time to respond. I really use your advice. This is the BEST site. Thanks! Marc
  15. Thanks Vern! Yes, I had already been through 9903.201-1. I know the question looked like I didn't take time to look it up and I just came to you for the answer! I just didn't want to get into too much dialogue. Sometimes too much info, I guess I just went straight to the facts. Next time, I will go through my thought process. Saying that, my specific question is, since we have a FFP agreement with the Prime, and since they have FFP and Sole Source, are we going to be Full or Modified. My contract with the Prime states specifically FFP and nowhere does it state that we are sole-source (except by virtue of the Teaming Agreement). We competed to get on the team and since paragraph 15 of 9903.201-1 states "Firm-fixed-prive contracts or subcontracs awarded on the basis of adequate price competition without submission of cost or pricing data" I am on the fence as to whether or not I am Full or Modified. In either case, having everything in place, except a Disclosure Statement (accounting system, timekeeping, etc) I was thinking Modified. But I could be wrong based on the other factors. Thanks, Marc
  16. Team, here are the facts: Firm-Fixed Price Prime is sole-source (only one with technology). DoD technology (non-commercial) We have negotiated a Teaming Agreement to be on the bid. (there were three subs that could have teamed with the Prime) Our agreement with Prime is Fixed Price. (since we are on the Teaming Agreement, I guess we would be sole-source) 5-year contract $100.0M Contract Will I be subject to CAS or Modified CAS? Thanks! Marc
  17. H2H, I know that I responded to this today! I thanked you for your quick reply and stated that I had used that basis for my decision. Some are questioning (the International Group) and I think that I need more information to understand the specifics. But I really do appreciate your fast response this afternoon, it really helped me! Mark
  18. I am fairly new to international companies. We just set up an SSA and I have several "sister" companies who will be subcontractors to us and need help in making sure that we do this right! Specific question on my plate: Our sister was a subcontractor to a large prime. Once the SSA was set up (earlier this year), we novated the contract to the SSA and now our sister is our subcontractor. We want to charge the sister Material & Handling/G&A of say, 18%. I have support for the rate, but are we able to burden the cost from our "sister sub"? 95% of our work will be us as "Prime" and sister companies as "subcontractor". We have no facilities, just our OH (Contracts, PM, Legal, B&P, Sales and Market, Finance, etc) How should we set up IC trading rules for this type of activity? Thanks, Mark
  19. Thanks! I do understand that you can have multiple G&A rates for the reasons that you identified. I am just speaking of having a contract for, application design in the US and one in say Germany, same company, same product. Specifically, can/should I have a different G&A Rate for CONUS and OCONUS? Thanks again.
  20. Hello Sensis! Grasshopper here! Quick question. I have a VP here wondering out loud about multiple G&A rates for CONUS and OCONUS. One home office, here in US, we could set up another company in the country that we are looking at. He stated that at his past company, the not only had multiple CONUS/OCONUS. OH (onsite/offsite) and multiple G&A. I have seen multiple OHs and fringes, but multiple G&A? HELP!
  • Create New...