Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'FFP type'.
I recently started working in IDIQ Service Task Order environment with primarily SOW. That being said, as a starting point the maximum number of hours for a given position is 1820 and the duties and tasks are not open ended with the type of work expected clearly laid out. For the SOW's the number of hours for the respective positions are stated for the base period and out years - ie "Position 1- 960 hours," for a 6 month base period. Some of the TO's are LOE, LH, or FFP (right or wrongly). My team recently awarded a TO and it was my position that it would be FFP. The SOW stipulated that hours and positions may be trimmed/increased based on conditions related to workload, but the tasks of the contractor is clearly defined. The SOW established expected hours for the respective positions. The TO has a 9 month base, a 3, 6 month options, with fixed labor rates (fully burdened) based on the rates negotiated at IDIQ level. Further, the duties are defined and not ambiguous and are more administrative than anything. The Contractor said it should be LOE, vice FFP. I disagree. For FFP LOE per FAR 16.207-1(b), with respect to FFP LOE, it reads that the government pays the contractor a fixed amount, which I read is to basically guarantee a fixed amount of money, regardless of whether services of equal value were provided. Further the work is not "for investigation or study in a specific research and development area." For LH: The application of LH reads FAR 16.601(2)(b) "Application. A time-and-materials contract may be used only when it is not possible at the time of placing the contract to estimate accurately the extent or duration of the work or to anticipate costs with any reasonable degree of confidence. See 12.207(b) for the use of time-and-material contracts for certain commercial services." We set the contract up with a 9 month base and the option periods based on our expectation of how long the services may be needed and the option periods to serve as a contingency if you will. So I don''t think the above, allows for use of LH in this situation. Thus, I think FFP, whereby the contractor invoices based o the number of actual hours worked is the most sensical approach. In simplistic terms, if 10 contractor's work 5 hours a day for 7 days" then they'd invoice for 350 hours for that period. I did some research and there seemed to be different philosophical views on whether a particular service contract should be FFP LOE/FFP/LH and it almost seemed like people prefer one over the other, not because its right, but because its just how they've always done it. My previous experience was in commercial FFP EPA IDIQ supply contracts, so I don't have as much familiarity with service contracts, so I appreciate anyone's thoughts/perspectives.
All, I ran into a problem on payment/invoicing. Please find below contract facts: (1) Service contract awarded under GSA MAS as FFP type (small contract <$1M/year), 1 base year plus 4 option years, currently on base year. (2) No labor hours specified on the contract; deliverables are straight forward: a monthly status report and a couple of other reports. (3) Invoices shall be submitted per FAR252.212-4(g) (4) The PoP starts one day after the contract was awarded; contract requires all personnel be available when PoP Start. Due to security requirements, it is impossible to staff all personnel when PoP starts, but my firm staffed all personnel in a month and during this time, all deliverables have been made and all reports have been turned in on time. The problem: Our invoices have been rejected by KO due to insufficient staffing. My questions are: (1) this is a FFP type contract. Should the payment be in lump-sum as long as all deliverables are met? (2) If the government refuses to pay, do we (contractor) have right to suspend our operation/on-site personnel? (3) Any other options can we take? Such as file a claim or REA? Thanks very much!