Tag Archives: Defense Procurement and Acquisition Policy

Can the Department of Defense Make Bold, Radical Changes to its Acquisition Process?

commercial item acquisition

Is commercial item acquisition the pathway for the Department of Defense (DoD) to fulfill its goal of having better access to the latest technological advances, and do DoD’s current acquisition rules and regulations hinder that goal?

Do commercial contractors think selling to the Federal Government, particularly to the DoD, is a worthwhile endeavor?

Are there too many DoD procurement regulations; and are the current regulations relevant?

A body of experts commissioned by Congress in the FY16 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) is addressing these questions and more.  

Read more ...

Department of Defense (DoD) Seeks Comments on Draft Commercial Item Acquisition Guidebooks

The Department of Defense’s (DoD) goal for procurement is to have an efficient acquisition system that is effective in providing support to the warfighter. The use of commercial item acquisition is seen as one way of achieving this goal, however there are currently varying levels of understanding and consistency within DoD regarding determining commerciality and in determining fair and reasonable prices.

Read more ...

Are Your IR&D Costs Allowable?

MH910216329It’s time to <RETHINK> how you determine allowability of IR&D costs.  Not rethinking your approach could result in the government deeming your IR&D costs expressly unallowable.  Spending a few minutes reading this blog will provide you with the required knowledge to ensure your IR&D costs continue to be allowable.

Effective January 30, 2012, the DFARS IR&D cost principle (DFARS 231.205-18(c)(iii)(C)) now requires, as a condition of allowability, contractors to report their IR&D projects to the Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC).  Even though this requirement applies only to “major contractors”, as defined in DFARS (DFARS 231.205-18(a)(iii)), the government encourages all contractors to follow this process.

There are additional consequences of not reporting your IR&D project to DTIC.  On April 24, 2014, DCAA issued guidance to their auditors explaining how the failure of complying with the DFARS requirement could impact Forward Pricing, Incurred Cost, Cost Accounting Standards, and Accounting System audits.  For example, DCAA asserts that a failure to comply with the reporting requirement may constitute a CAS 405 noncompliance and an Accounting System deficiency.

Haven’t reported your IR&D projects to DTIC?  Have no fear! Fortunately,

Read more ...

And Then They Were Gone…The Department of Defense Slows Payments to Contractors

In August 2012 Defense Procurement and Acquisition Policy (DPAP) issued Class Deviation 2012-O0014 which implemented accelerated payments to prime contractors, who were in turn, to accelerate payments to their subcontractors. On February 21, 2013, Richard Ginman, Director, DPAP, issued a letter which rescinded Class Deviation 2012-O0014. This is only the beginning of the effects of sequestration.

The payment acceleration policy was implemented to assist with the cash flow of all small-business contractors, whether they are prime contractors or subcontractors to non-small-businesses. While the policy of accelerating payments has been rescinded the DoD will continue with the policy

Read more ...

View Archives

Authors

Latest Webinar Videos