Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs

tharmon

"Realignment of funds" between CLINS = ratification?

Recommended Posts

I have a contractor who's quite bossy to the customer and has jipping money from the government for the last 7 or so years. They'd do this buy creating and ID/IQ contract for 5 years, have a few task orders, each one having 1001 A&AS and 2001 Travel. Now, let's just use some examples on how much they estimate each CLIN price, 1001 - $25 mil, 2001 - $5 million.

Now every time we can tell that they are clearly not traveling for $5 million dollars, you know why? Because they tell the customer that they "need more money" for the CLIN 1001 due to underestimating the amount needed to fund it. they go on to tell them that "hey!, theres still money on 2001, why not move it over??" (Which is usually around 4.5 mil each time). THIS IS BULL. Mostly because each time they ask for the funding transfer it's somewhere near the end of september and the funds are about to expire, so they just are selfish pigs and try to take all of the money before FY## comes and destroys the funds.

Last time they did this, another CS told them they cannot do that and if they want to file a claim that they deserve the funds, go ahead. Have yet to see one claim.

And on top of that, the customer just wants to pay them off because if they don't "we'll have to do a ratification, and i don't want to go through that trouble".....LAZY.

Seems like they just put money into the travel clin only to use it later for A&AS.

This also may be crossing some bonefide need rule as the funds are not 2 year money.

Any advice?

P.S. The contract is FFP and the reasoning the customer says we should do this is because, "

These are non-severable services, orders as needed, at the

convenience of the government. There is some confusion on the CLINs being

designated Firm Fixed Price but this is just an artifact of the contract

writing system. The CLINs themselves represent only "not to exceed amounts"

of the government's best estimates of the rates that are fixed priced."

Has anyone seen anything about how they "aren't technically FFP?" There's nothing about that in the contract, only that it's FFP.

Edited by tharmon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any advice?

Yes. (1) Call the cops. (2) Learn how to spell gyp. (3) Either learn how to write a comprehensible post or wait until you're not angry before you write.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has anyone seen anything about how they "aren't technically FFP?" There's nothing about that in the contract, only that it's FFP.

Are you thinking about FAR 16.201(b )? "Time-and-materials contracts and labor-hour contracts are not fixed-price contracts."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are just so many things wrong with your posting. But you made one statement that has me curious.

And on top of that, the customer just wants to pay them off because if they don't "we'll have to do a ratification, and i don't want to go through that trouble".....LAZY.

Please explain how the customer figures if they do not agree to increasing the task order line item that they will end up doing a ratification. A ratification is done when a Government representative that lacks the authority to enter into an agreement on the Government's behalf does so anyhow.

I agree with Vern. Your post is difficult to comprehend. I also agree with JWomack. You seem to be blaming the contractor for the Government's ineptness.

Lastly, if you really believe that the contractor is defrauding the Government, which is what you posting suggests, and you can prove it, then call the IG - not the cops (you should understand that Vern was just being facetious).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

tharmon,

I agree with all other posters, just want to add another thought.

If you really believe that "the customer" is obligating funds that it knows to be excess to its needs, then you need to call your IG ... on the customer, not the contractor.

H2H

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would echo those recommending a call to your IG, but I will not. Instead, I recommend you run to your IG.

Coherency to the side, I started imagining the witnesses testifying when I read the following:

...Now, let's just use some examples on how much they estimate each CLIN price, 1001 - $25 mil, 2001 - $5 million.

...Now every time we can tell that they are clearly not traveling for $5 million dollars, you know why? Because they tell the customer that they "need more money" for the CLIN 1001 due to underestimating the amount needed to fund it. they go on to tell them that "hey!, theres still money on 2001, why not move it over??" (Which is usually around 4.5 mil each time). ...

...The CLINs themselves represent only "not to exceed amounts" of the government's best estimates of the rates that are fixed priced."

It appears there is either a complete absence of internal controls (not to mention an audit trail) governing the preparation of the government cost estimate, OR a complete disregard. I'd hate to be the KO having to answer a question about how the government estimate for this project is documented in their file. Since you know "every time" that you will be millions off, where is the good faith effort?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bet I know what happens if the IG got involved - the program office says the contract office won't tell them how to do it right. They add they do it this way because it's faster, easier, and it gets done.

These situations happen all the time but not everywhere. There are agencies where the program office has trust, respect, and mutual cooperation with their COs. Typically that occurs after a lot of work by the contracts office and involvement by senior management. It starts with having COs that are knowledgable, trained, and experienced and understand program needs. It also involves using effective communication techniques.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The contracting office has to do the mod. If they do it, and if it's wrong, then they are at fault. Particularly, the CO who signs is to blame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×