CPAs and Advisors with Your Growth in Mind

Subcontractor Oversight (Who’s Responsible?)

By: John N. Ford, JD ; Senior Consultant  Who has privity? 42.505 – Post-award Subcontractor Conferences (a) The prime contractor is generally responsible for conducting post-award conferences with subcontractors. However, the prime contractor may invite Government representatives to a conference with subcontractors, or the Government may request that the prime contractor initiate a conference with subcontractors. The prime contractor should ensure that representatives from involved contract administration offices are invited. (b) Government representatives– (1) Must recognize the lack of privity of contract between the Government and subcontractors; (2) Shall not take action that is inconsistent with or alters subcontracts; and (3) Shall ensure that. Read More.

Topics: , , , , , ,

Accounting System Assessment – Alliant 2 Contract

By: Eric Poppe, Manager; Kristen Kwiatkowski, Manager; and Jacob Barclay, Consultant There have long been rumors that the General Services Administration (“GSA”) will be releasing Alliant 2 (“A2”) and Alliant 2 Small Business (“A2SB”) Governmentwide Acquisition Contract (“GWAC”) Request for Proposals (“RFP”) in the near future. While there has been much speculation of a June 2016 release, nothing yet is certain. As companies begin to prepare for the final release of these two separate solicitations, companies should consider what regulatory impact the potential award could have on their compliance environment. The Draft Request for Proposals (“DRFP”) previously released on March. Read More.

Topics: , , , , , , ,

Audit Alert Issued for DCMA Implementation Guidance on Blended Compensation Caps

On February 19, 2016, the Defense Contract Audit Agency (“DCAA”) issued Memorandum for Regional Directors (“MRD”) 16-PSP-005(R), Audit Alert on DCMA Implementation Guidance on Blended Compensation Caps. The Alert provides auditors with official guidance when dealing with blended compensation caps with contractors, and in tandem with the Defense Contract Management Agency (“DCMA”). What does this mean? Let’s take a few steps back to October 2014, when Shay Assad, the Director of Defense Pricing Acquisition Technology, and Logistics OUSD (“AT&L”), issued a memo stating that use of a blended rate is deemed “practical and cost efficient.” This was in reaction to. Read More.

Topics: , , , , ,

The Clock is Ticking: Getting an Edge on Your Annual ICS

It’s that time of year. Your personal tax returns are complete. Your company completed its taxes on time. The auditors wrapped up the financial statement audit. Is there time to breathe? Certainly not…It’s finally time to prepare your annual Incurred Cost Submission (ICS)! For companies with fiscal year ending December 31, 2015, the 2015 ICS will be due by June 30, 2016, six months after the close of your fiscal year. Throughout the years, we have seen a variety of different hiccups and struggles for companies as they shift out of “busy season.” Here are a few things to consider. Read More.

Topics: , , ,

New Guidance–Limited Role for DCAA Audit of Non-DoD Contracts

The 2016 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA, S.1356) (“the Act”) includes a number of sections related to Acquisition Policy or Acquisition Management. In particular, the Act discusses the subject of the Defense Contract Audit Agency (“DCAA”) contract audits and the requirements for improved auditing on the incurred cost backlog (“Indirect Cost Rate Proposals”; “ICPs”) are explicitly mentioned. Section 893 prohibits DCAA from performing any audits for non-defense agencies (e.g., National Aeronautics and Space Administration (“NASA”)), unless the Department of Defense (“DoD”) certifies that DCAA is current on the ICP backlog or less. This restriction could cause some disruption for contractors. Read More.

Topics: , , , ,

Department of Defense Continues to Tinker with the Allowability of IR&D

Beginning in 2011, the Department of Defense (“DoD”) began making changes to the supplemental cost principle on Independent Research and Development (IR&D) found at the Defense Federal Acquisition Supplement (DFARS) 231.205-18. These changes have not affected the definition of IR&D found at Federal Acquisition Regulation 31.205-18. Instead, they have addressed what certain contractors must do in order for their IR&D costs to be allowable on government contracts. The latest proposed change in the allowability requirements set forth in the DFARS was published in the Federal Register on February 16, 2016 . The proposed change reformats the existing DFARS 231.205-18(c)(iii)(C) and adds a new requirement that reads: For IR&D projects. Read More.

Topics: , , , , , ,