Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs

hsbailey

Parts received after Task Order PoP end date

Recommended Posts

Parts were ordered to support work on a task order.  The parts had a long lead time and arrived several weeks after the task order PoP ended.  DCAA is denying the payment of the invoice as the parts were not received within the task order PoP.  We have always operated (not that it makes it right...), without question,  that as long as the PO was cut prior to the task order PoP end date we were OK with the costs counting for that task order.  Now we have DCAA denying two invoices.

Anyone else have experience with this issue?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the contract type? What is being acquired? Is this a "best effort" or "completion" task order?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, here_2_help said:

Is this a "best effort" or "completion" task order?

You meant "level-of-effort" not "best effort", right? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, not really, Don. Best effort contracts permit the contractor to abandon work without delivery, once the funding has been spent, whereas completion contracts require actual completion. At least, that's the lesson I took away from the DIVAD case. Am I mistaken?

That said, I'll grant you that a LOE contract would absolutely be subject to a strict period of performance cost limitation. Given that we are discussing "parts" I assumed this was for a product not a service. We'll see what the OP says.

Another question for the OP:  How did you deliver a product without all the necessary parts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You appear to have said that the parts were ordered to support work on a task order but were not used.  So, they  apparently weren't needed to support work on the task order. Is that correct?

You used the term "task order", which usually signifies that the order is  for services, whereas the term "delivery order", is associated with products.  Is that the context here? 

Can the parts be returned for a credit?  

Well, anyway, please clarify per H2H's request . Thanks.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HSBaily: Can you provide additional details regarding DCAA's basis for questioning these costs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, here_2_help said:

Well, not really, Don. Best effort contracts permit the contractor to abandon work without delivery, once the funding has been spent, whereas completion contracts require actual completion. At least, that's the lesson I took away from the DIVAD case. Am I mistaken?

Completion contracts don't necessarily require actual completion--they could just require a contractor's best efforts to achieve completion. The terms "completion" and "level-of-effort" are used to describe how the contract describes the scope of work. There's a good discussion of the distinction in the FAR as it relates to CPFF contracts at FAR 16.306( d ):

Quote

 

Completion and term forms. A cost-plus-fixed-fee contract may take one of two basic forms—completion or term.

(1) The completion form describes the scope of work by stating a definite goal or target and specifying an end product. This form of contract normally requires the contractor to complete and deliver the specified end product (e.g., a final report of research accomplishing the goal or target) within the estimated cost, if possible, as a condition for payment of the entire fixed fee. However, in the event the work cannot be completed within the estimated cost, the Government may require more effort without increase in fee, provided the Government increases the estimated cost.

(2) The term form describes the scope of work in general terms and obligates the contractor to devote a specified level of effort for a stated time period. Under this form, if the performance is considered satisfactory by the Government, the fixed fee is payable at the expiration of the agreed-upon period, upon contractor statement that the level of effort specified in the contract has been expended in performing the contract work. Renewal for further periods of performance is a new acquisition that involves new cost and fee arrangements.

 

In a cost-reimbursement contract, either form obligates the contractor to provide its "best efforts". This obligation is stated in either the Limitation of Funds or Limitation of Cost clause. See FAR 52.232-20( a ):

Quote

The parties estimate that performance of this contract, exclusive of any fee, will not cost the Government more than (1) the estimated cost specified in the Schedule or, (2) if this is a cost-sharing contract, the Government’s share of the estimated cost specified in the Schedule. The Contractor agrees to use its best efforts to perform the work specified in the Schedule and all obligations under this contract within the estimated cost, which, if this is a cost-sharing contract, includes both the Government’s and the Contractor’s share of the cost.

Make sense?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don, thanks for the education.

I was recalling the DIVAD case -- admittedly an outlier -- where the contractor had a FFP "best efforts" contract. That turned out to be a cost-type contract by another name.

H2H

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×