Jump to content
  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type

Forums

  • Instructions, Terms of Use, Q&A, Commentary, Opinions & Debates
    • Terms Of Use
    • Before You Register, Before You Post, Instructions for Writing Your Question
    • Q&A
    • Commentary, Opinions & Debates
  • Contracting Forum
    • WIFCON PODCAST
    • What Happened?
    • Polls
    • For Beginners Only
    • About The Regulations
    • COVID-19 And Its Effect on Contracting
    • Contracting Workforce
    • The Good, The Bad, the Ugly
    • 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
  • Contest

Blogs

  • The Wifcon Blog
  • Don Mansfield's Blog
  • Emptor Cautus' Blog
  • SmallGovCon.com
  • NIH NITAAC Blog
  • The Contractor's Perspective
  • Government Contracts Legal Forum
  • Government Contracts Blog
  • Government Contracts Insights
  • NIH NITAAC Blog
  • High-Performance Track Systems | iAutomation

Calendars

  • Community Calendar

Product Groups

There are no results to display.

Categories

  • Rules & Tools
  • Legal Opinions
  • News

Find results in

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start

    End

Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Found 2 results

  1. Federal Register :: Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Requiring Data Other Than Certified Cost or Pricing Data (DFARS Case 2020-D008)
  2. We conduct cost/price analysis on behalf of federal primes and subs and have never flinched in using prior price history as a basis for price analysis (assuming, of course, that the historical price can be substantiated as fair and reasonable as well as a suitable basis in and of itself, a whole other topic of conversation...) Recently, we took a closer look at FAR 15.404-1( (2), which reads as follows: The Government may use various price analysis techniques and procedures to ensure a fair and reasonable price. Examples of such techniques include, but are not limited to, the following: (ii) Comparison of the proposed prices to historical prices paid, whether by the Government or other than the Government, for the same or similar items. This method may be used for commercial items including those “of a type” or requiring minor modifications. Am I reading this wrong or does this say analysis based on historical pricing is only valid for commercial items? Let's say the contractor purchases items which required cost analysis (subject to TINA). Three months later, a new requirement pops up (under TINA threshold but over simplified acquisition). Since these are not commercial items, would this prior procurement and cost analysis not be a suitable basis for determining price reasonableness (of course after adjusting for quantity and passage of time)?