2018 NDAA: Changes to TINA Threshold and Incurred Cost Audits
In November, the conference committee for the National Defense Authorization Act (“NDAA”) for fiscal year 2018 completed one of the final steps in the NDAA process filing its report reconciling the differences between the House version and the Senate version of the legislation. Shortly after the reports were reconciled, the conference report was officially enacted into law as the fiscal year 2018 NDAA. This bill authorizes fiscal year 2018 appropriations and sets forth policies for Department of Defense (“DOD”) programs and activities. One of the major changes in the fiscal year 2018 NDAA, Section 811, is the increase in the. Read More.
No More DCAA Performing ICS Audits?
No more Defense Contract Audit Agency (“DCAA”) auditors auditing your company’s incurred cost submission? It could happen! As a result of the 2018 National Defense Authorization Act (“NDAA”) signed by President Trump on December 12, 2017, it is a real possibility for an independent accounting firm to audit your incurred cost submission instead of auditors from the DCAA. Under the NDAA, which outlines defense spending priorities for the new fiscal year and established federal funding levels, there is a provision for the Department of Defense (“DoD”) to start using private auditors to perform some incurred cost audits. The idea is. Read More.
Topics: 2018 National Defense Authorization Act, audits, Defense Contract Audit Agency "DCAA", Department of Defense "DoD", Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards "GAGAS", Incurred Cost Submission "ICS"
Contractor’s Obligations to Monitor their Subcontractors
By: John Ford , Senior Consultant and Eric Poppe , Senior Manager Federal Acquisition Regulation (“FAR”) 42.202(e)(2) states that “[t]he prime contractor is responsible for managing its subcontractors.” However, the FAR does not provide further guidance as to what this means. At least one Defense Contract Audit Agency (“DCAA”) office and Defense Contract Management Agency (“DCMA”) contracting officer have contended that this means that prime contractors are to perform all the functions of a DCMA Contract Administration Office in regard to subcontractors. Based on this theory, the Administrative Contracting Officer (“ACO”) issued a claim for over $100,000,000 against Lockheed Martin Integrated Systems, Inc. (“LMIS”). Read More.
Deadline for Cybersecurity Compliance Rapidly Approaching
By: Sara Crabtree , Senior Manager and Neal Beggan , Principal No one thinks a cybersecurity breach will ever happen to their company until the day it actually happens. At that point, all of the discussions, gap analysis and planning that could have occurred to prevent the breach is but wishful thinking for the ability to rewind time. We can bet Target wishes it had discussed cybersecurity requirements with all of their subcontractors prior to finding out that a refrigeration and HVAC subcontractor was the reason that 40 million of its debit and credit card accounts were hacked at the end of 2013. In. Read More.
GAO Sustains a Bid Protest Based on an Improper Arbitration Agreement
By: John Ford , Senior Consultant Most of us have probably heard of the accusations of sexual harassment levied against the movie producer Harvey Weinstein. Some of you may not be aware that there is a government contracting aspect to this story. Section 8116 of the 2010 Department of Defense (“DoD”) Appropriations Act (P.L. 111-118) (“the Act”) provides in part that: None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this Act may be expended for any Federal contract for an amount in excess of $1,000,000 that is awarded more than 60 days after the effective date of this Act, unless. Read More.
Court of Federal Claims Reverses OHA Decision finding Affiliation
Veterans Technology, LLC (“Vet Tech”) is a joint venture whose stock is owned 49 percent by a company named MDW and 51 percent by Defense Acquisition, Inc. (“DAI”). MDW was formed in 2012 by four individuals who were then employed by Paradigm Technologies, Inc. However, on January 30, 2011, ECS Federal, LLC (“ECS”), acquired Paradigm, but the acquisition did not close until January 1, 2012. Subsequently, Paradigm became a wholly owned subsidiary of ECS during calendar year 2012, and all Paradigm contracts were subsequently novated to ECS. Shortly after Paradigm was acquired by ECS, the four employees informed ECS of. Read More.