Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'FAR 16.306(a)'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • Instructions and Terms of Use
    • Terms Of Use
    • Before You Register, Before You Post
  • Contracting Forum
    • What Happened?
    • Polls
    • COVID-19 And Its Effect on Contracting
    • For Beginners Only
    • Contracting Workforce
    • Recommended Reading
    • Contract Award Process
    • Contract Pricing Including CAS & Allowable Costs
    • Contract Administration
    • Schedules, GWACS, MACs, IDIQs
    • Subcontracts & Subcontract Management
    • Small Business, Socioeconomic Programs
    • Proposed Law & Regulations; Legal Decisions


  • The Wifcon Blog
  • Don Mansfield's Blog
  • Bob Antonio's Blog
  • NCMA HQ Blog
  • Professor Ralph Nash's Blog
  • Emptor Cautus' Blog
  • Centre Knowledge Blog
  • Leftbrainpro.com Answer Blog
  • SmallGovCon.com
  • Patterns of Procurement
  • SAM
  • “Three-In-Two” Rule for Joint Ventures


  • Community Calendar

Product Groups

There are no results to display.


  • Rules & Tools
  • Legal Opinions
  • News

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start





Website URL







Found 1 result

  1. Anyone know of an online resource that shows all the changes to the FAR and its preceding regulations? I'm looking to see when and why the following at FAR 16.306(a) was incorporated: "The fixed fee does not vary with actual cost, but may be adjusted as a result of changes in work to be performed under the contract." The reason I am looking for this is because I'm having a discussion about including a special clause to a competitive source selection. This special clause works as a negative incentive where if the firm does not comply with the terms and conditions of the contract, this clause would be enforced and the contractor would lose at least a specified portion of the fee per the clause. The intent of this clause is to encourage the contractor to put more focus on its administration of the contract but if they do not, the Government has a way to enforce non-compliance quickly vs. handling this in a sole source post-award environment (where getting consideration is often a time consuming effort). I am being told I can only use the applicable termination clauses to enforce non-compliance because FAR 16.306(a) specifies when the fee can change. While I agree the text states that the fee is fixed at time of award and doesn't change unless changes in the work occur, it is not clear to me whether the writers were considering post award administration issues that may arise and whether they would not agree with this type of clause being added to the contract. To me, the fee is fixed provided the contractor and Government adhere to the contract. If either party changes the contract or does not adhere to it, consideration is required. I don't think this type of clause violates the intent of the CPFF contract type based on that understanding. All this clause does is resolve the consideration issue for a specific issue when non-compliance occurs in a post award environment. Sometimes understanding the context as to why the language was incorporated can provide better insight and help me know if I am off base or not. Any insight, recommendations, or thoughts are welcome. Note: This clause does not override the termination clauses, it merely sets a floor as to what the minimum consideration would be for non-compliance.
  • Create New...