Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'contract'.
Found 4 results
There is a debate in my agency on who is responsible for requesting funding to the Comptroller and at what point in the contract process funding must be provided. Currently the program office submits a requirements package to Contracts and Finance. However, Finance does not want to provide funding or availability of funding promise for the requirement until Contracts submits a request for funding, which must include the contract number, contractor, purpose, and exact amount to be funded. In several occasions, Contracts is ready to award a contract; however finance stops the award since there is no funding for the contract. My opinion is that the Program Office is responsible to request funding to Finance and provide it to Contracts as part of the requirements package. Also my understanding is that Contracts is not supposed to start the contract process until funding or availability of funding notice has been received. This has been an ongoing battle between Finance and Contracts for a couple of years now and the process would not change if I do not show an instruction showing otherwise. Any advice?
Hello Wifcon Forum Members, I've recently began reviewing a physically completed T&M/LH for closeout purposes. This particular T&M/LH contract has the following specifications under the heading "Maximum Hours and Cost" for the following two labor categories: Sr. Software Engineer - 656 hours at $/hour Program Manager - 18 Hours at $/hour A review of the contract invoices shows the following amount of Labor Hours billed/charged during the course of the contract: Sr. Software Engineer - 381 hours Program Manager - 38 hours As you can see, the SSE was well under the allotted hours and the PM was slightly over. My main questions concerning this situation are : Given that the PM charged more than the 18 allotted hours, would our company need to issue a refund of the 20 hours paid in excess of the PM allotted hours? Would the fact that we were well under the total amount of allotted hours (SSE & PM allotted total hours) and came in well under the funded amount (DE obligated the excess funding) to finish the job make any difference? I read through FAR 52.232-7 - Payments under Time and Materials and Labor Hour Contracts, specifically the section concerning "Hourly Rates" and more specifically part 3 (see bold below). Would hour allotments fit into the "labor qualification" mentioned below in part 3? "(a) Hourly rate. (1) Hourly rate means the rate(s) prescribed in the contract for payment for labor that meets the labor category qualifications of a labor category specified in the contract that are— (2) The amounts shall be computed by multiplying the appropriate hourly rates prescribed in the Schedule by the number of direct labor hours performed. (3) The hourly rates shall be paid for all labor performed on the contract that meets the labor qualifications specified in the contract. Labor hours incurred to perform tasks for which labor qualifications were specified in the contract will not be paid to the extent the work is performed by employees that do not meet the qualifications specified in the contract, unless specifically authorized by the Contracting Officer. (4) The hourly rates shall include wages, indirect costs, general and administrative expense, and profit. Fractional parts of an hour shall be payable on a prorated basis. (5) Vouchers may be submitted not more than once every two weeks, to the Contracting Officer or authorized representative. A small business concern may receive more frequent payments than every two weeks. The Contractor shall substantiate vouchers (including any subcontractor hours reimbursed at the hourly rate in the schedule) by evidence of actual payment and by— (6) Promptly after receipt of each substantiated voucher, the Government shall, except as otherwise provided in this contract, and subject to the terms of paragraph (e) of this clause, pay the voucher as approved by the Contracting Officer or authorized representative. (7) Unless otherwise prescribed in the Schedule, the Contracting Officer may unilaterally issue a contract modification requiring the Contractor to withhold amounts from its billings until a reserve is set aside in an amount that the Contracting Officer considers necessary to protect the Government’s interests. The Contracting Officer may require a withhold of 5 percent of the amounts due under paragraph (a), but the total amount withheld for the contract shall not exceed $50,000. The amounts withheld shall be retained until the Contractor executes and delivers the release required by paragraph (g) of this clause. (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. (i) Performed by the Contractor; (ii) Performed by the Subcontractors; or (iii) Transferred between divisions, subsidiaries, or affiliated of the Contractor under a common control. (i) Individual daily job timekeeping records; (ii) Records that verify the employees meet the qualifications for the labor categories specified in the contract; or (iii) Other substantiation approved by the Contracting Officer." Any guidance/advice would be appreciated. V/r, KR_2016
http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economic-sciences/laureates/2016/popular-economicsciences2016.pdf The fake Nobel Prize in Economics* was awarded to Oliver Hart and Bengt Holmstrom for their contributions to "contract theory." *There is no such thing as a Nobel Prize in Economics. Sweden's central bank created this prize in the late 1960s supposedly in memory of Alfred Nobel. Each year, the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences awards the "Sveriges Riksbanks Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel."
I am faced with what I once thought was a simple question, which is when does a contract end? We are having a difference of opinions on this topic in my office. Some believe that if you have a contract for a specific period of time and you don't get what you paid for then the contract is still valid and can be modified. I believe that the contract ends when the period of performance ends and any modifications to the period of performance have to occur prior to the period of performance ending. Here is an example, a contract for repair of a boat has a period of performance of 12 months and the repair is not complete at 12 months and at month 15 it is discovered that more parts are needed to complete the repair and therefore more money is needed on the contract, can you do a mod to the contract to add more money at month 15 when the period of performance ended at month 12? I would think that the period of performance is part of the scope and therefore any work outside of the period of performance unless modified before hand is out of scope and would require a J&A but that may not be correct. I have searched extensively to get a definitive answer on this, can anyone help?