Jump to content

Contract Modification Within Scope?


j_dude77

Recommended Posts

Here is the scenario.

The government has procured a data package that feeds information directly to a monitoring center. The monitoring center uses this information for prediction analysis. This package contains 20+ distinct types of information. The government wants to upgrade one of the types of information to provide global data, as opposed to national data.

Would you consider this change in the contract to be within scope?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is the scenario.

The government has procured a data package that feeds information directly to a monitoring center. The monitoring center uses this information for prediction analysis. This package contains 20+ distinct types of information. The government wants to upgrade one of the types of information to provide global data, as opposed to national data.

Would you consider this change in the contract to be within scope?

As the primary purpose of the contract is info gathering and since you wish to upgrade to gather a bit more data, I believe the answer is "Yes".

However, I recommend you read pages 382-396 of the fourth edition of the Administration of Government Contracts, by Cibinic, Nash, and Nagle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the reference and answer. I read the pages you referred to before asking the question and read them again. I agree that this would be considered an in-scope change.

The debate began around whether the modification would have to be synopsised. My arguement was that the modification did not need to be, due to it not being a "contract action" according to FAR 5.001.

Unfortunately it seems that the prevailling perception in my shop is that any change to the original contract constitutes an out-of-scope change. I do tire of the answer to a contracting question being, "because we have always done it this way".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is the scenario.

The government has procured a data package that feeds information directly to a monitoring center. The monitoring center uses this information for prediction analysis. This package contains 20+ distinct types of information. The government wants to upgrade one of the types of information to provide global data, as opposed to national data.

Would you consider this change in the contract to be within scope?

How extensive is the technical effort to implement the change in data sources? If very little is involved, then I would ask the naysayers what is the point of issuing a new contract to obtain the information? Do they want you to delete the current information from the instant contract? Keep obtaining it and then obtain global data, too? Try to justify a separate sole source out-of-scope mod?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How extensive is the technical effort to implement the change in data sources?

The data is transferred through an existing satellite feed (like Direct TV). They would just sent the upgraded data packet through the feed instead of the current one.

If very little is involved, then I would ask the naysayers what is the point of issuing a new contract to obtain the information?

I think there is a disconnect with the terminology they use. They do not want me to issue a new contract for the specific upgrade. The phrase I keep hearing is, "that does not fall into the original scope of the contract".

Do they want you to delete the current information from the instant contract? Keep obtaining it and then obtain global data, too?

They just want to replace the national data with global data. No change will be made to quantities or period of performance. There is a price increase though.

Try to justify a separate sole source out-of-scope mod?

They have not told me that. Although, I am sure they would use 6.302-1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How extensive is the technical effort to implement the change in data sources?

The data is transferred through an existing satellite feed (like Direct TV). They would just sent the upgraded data packet through the feed instead of the current one.

If very little is involved, then I would ask the naysayers what is the point of issuing a new contract to obtain the information?

I think there is a disconnect with the terminology they use. They do not want me to issue a new contract for the specific upgrade. The phrase I keep hearing is, "that does not fall into the original scope of the contract".

Do they want you to delete the current information from the instant contract? Keep obtaining it and then obtain global data, too?

They just want to replace the national data with global data. No change will be made to quantities or period of performance. There is a price increase though.

Try to justify a separate sole source out-of-scope mod?

They have not told me that. Although, I am sure they would use 6.302-1.

Dude, you originally asked if we "consider this change in the contract to be within scope?" You said in a post earlier today that "the prevailling perception in my shop is that any change to the original contract constitutes an out-of-scope change." If the "upgrade" in one of the types of information to "provide global data, as opposed to national data" is "out of scope", it technically isn't an "out-of-scope-change". Then it would be an out-of-scope "modification" that is being added to the contract via a supplemental agreement between the parties, simply for convenience, instead of having to issue a separate contract.

According to the Government Contracts Reference Book, Second Edition, published by George Washington University, a "change" is "Any alteration to a contract permitted by a contract clause." It also says that contract changes may be bilateral or unilateral.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

THIS POST WAS EDITED on 12/21/2011:

How extensive is the technical effort to implement the change in data sources?

The data is transferred through an existing satellite feed (like Direct TV). They would just sent the upgraded data packet through the feed instead of the current one.

...There is a price increase though.

You apparently didn't understand my question "How extensive is the technical effort to implement the change in data sources?". As Vern said below, you haven't shed much light on the actual nature of the change in the data sources or methods that the contractor uses to obtain national or global data, the rough order of magnitude of the additional effort and the relative cost to the contractor or relative value of this information vs. the other 20+ types of information currently in the contract.

The "change" appears to me to be in how the data is gathered. It will still be reported the same way as for national data, although maybe in more detail, which may or may not be automated or automatically populated, once the report is formatted and/or programmed. You need to consider whether an extensive effort and/or extensive additional cost to the contractor or resources is necessary to obtain and report global information vs. national data.

The mere fact that there is a change in the contract's statement of work (it may be called "the scope of work" in the contract) doesn't mean that it is "out-of-scope". Consider the above factors, read Nash and Cibinic's discussion of in-scope vs. out-of-scope in Administration of Government Contracts and then decide.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Vern Edwards
Unfortunately it seems that the prevailling perception in my shop is that any change to the original contract constitutes an out-of-scope change.

You said, "it seems." If they actually believe that all changes are out of scope, then they are incompetent fools. In any case, most people out there using the word "scope" don't know what it means.

While anything is possible, it hardly seems likely that expanding the data pool from national to global of only one out of 20 data items would be out of scope. However, it is impossible to say based on the limited info you have provided.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for all the replies.

After some further conversation with j_dude, it appears that the contractor already has the data and that the change would be in the sorting and reporting of the data. Bottom line, the customer needs more (or broader data) of that particular type data for their analysis; it would appear to be within the general scope of the original contract for data acquisition and reporting (transmission) of numerous pieces of data information; the change would be in the reporting (transmission) of data to the customer's computer(s) for one piece of information.

I still don't know - but will assume for the purposes of this discussion - that there is probably a minor contractor reprogramming effort required to provide the additional information. No big deal, if that is correct.

If I'm not understanding the scope of the requested change, then j_dude's naysayers should be able to explain to him why it is "out-of-scope" and not a simple "change to the scope".

Maybe it is semantics. At any rate, this discussion has reinforced in my mind one of the most fundamental aspects of contract administration, particularly when it comes to deciding to modify the contract. One must understand the scope of work as awarded, must be able to grasp the scope as modified, be able to determine what would be involved in technically implementing the change (technical approach) and the impact on the unchanged work if the change is implemented. That should help you to determine if it is within the general scope of the original contract as competed. this may involve preliminary discussions with the contractor as well as the user.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...