NCMA Upper Chesapeake Chapter John Shire Deputy Assistant Director Policy and Plans Defense Contract...
-
Upload
norah-black -
Category
Documents
-
view
217 -
download
1
Transcript of NCMA Upper Chesapeake Chapter John Shire Deputy Assistant Director Policy and Plans Defense Contract...
NCMA Upper Chesapeake Chapter
John ShireDeputy Assistant Director
Policy and PlansDefense Contract Audit Agency
The views expressed in this presentation are DCAA's views and not necessarily the views of other DoD organizations
2
DCAA Organization
DirectorPatrick FitzgeraldDeputy Director
Anita Bales
CentralRegion
Tim CarrVacant
EasternRegion
Paul PhillipsGary Spjut
NortheasternRegion
Ron MeldonianWilliam Adie
Mid-AtlanticRegionVacant
Steve Hernandez
WesternRegion
Donald MullinaxDavid Johnson
General CounselDefense Legal Service
Susan Chadick
Assistant Director,Resources
Philip Anderson
Assistant Director,Policy & PlansKen Saccoccia
Assistant DirectorOperationsTom Peters
Internal ReviewKaren Cash
Field Detachment Karen Cash
Terry Schneider
RegionsHeadquarters
Assistant Director, Integrity &
Quality AssuranceDon McKenzie
Executive OfficerJoe Garcia
Executive OfficerJoe Garcia
3
Deliver High Quality Services and Products
Agency will use new Strategic Plan to work audit quality and workforce issues
Established proposal walk-through and early identification of issues/inadequacies
All Raytheon audits under cognizance of one region Issued extensive changes to audit guidance, procedures and
processes Authorized additional management/supervisory positions to
allow more time on audits Holding Agency-wide Field Audit Office (FAO) Managers
Conference annually
4
Requirements/Workload and Resources
Working with Stakeholders to defer or divest low risk workload - will allow DCAA to focus on higher risk work with larger payback to Warfighter/Taxpayer.
Added 500 new employees over the last 2 years
DPAP Memorandum (1/4/2011), “Better Buying Power: Guidance for Obtaining Greater Efficiency and Productivity in Defense Spending: ‘Align DCMA and DCAA Processes to Ensure Work is Complementary” Increased Thresholds for Price Proposal Audits Forward Pricing Rate Agreements/Forward Pricing Rate
Recommendations Financial Capability Reviews Purchasing System Reviews Contractor Business Systems Rule
5
Making a concerted effort to engage with stakeholders: Issued “Rules of Engagement” Initiated regular high level meetings with contracting
communityExecutives participated at speaking engagements with
DoD Procurement and Contractor Associations Issued Joint DCAA/DCMA Directors Memorandums
Established MOU on EVMS
Improve Communications and Working Relationships with Stakeholders
6
DCAA Rules of EngagementMRD 10-PAS -023 and 024 dated Sept 9, 2010
Issued guidance on establishing open and effective communications with all stakeholders
Rules cover communications during each phase of the auditEstablishing the engagementEntrance conferenceDuring the auditExit conferencePost report issuanceNegotiations
7
Highlights of Rules of Engagement
Hold discussions with the requestor before beginning the audit to identify specific areas of concern
All parties participate in the contractor walk-through of the proposal
During the audit Keep stakeholders informed of major audit issues Timely notification of required extensions Status of audit communicated clearly
Provide draft results after manager review Include the contracting officer in the exit conferenceAuditor attendance at negotiations
8
Unique Value of the Audit
FAR 15.404-1(c)(2) provides that when a contracting officer performs “cost analysis” it includes verifying: The offeror’s cost data or pricing data and That the offeror’s cost submissions are in accordance with the contract
cost principles and procedures in FAR part 31 and, when applicable, the requirements and procedures in 48 CFR Chapter 99, Cost Accounting Standards.
The Price Analyst, adhering to the Contract Pricing Reference Guide (Volume 3- Cost Analysis), may perform many of the procedures discussed.
However, the Auditor, with access to the contractor’s books and financial records, can evaluate the validity of historical data and other supporting records.
Typically, contractors use historical costs to justify proposed costs. If we do not verify that historical costs are compliant, then historical non-compliant costs could go undetected, and the Government risks negotiating a proposal value that includes similar non-compliant costs.
9
Forward Pricing Proposal Adequacy
Adequate Contractor Proposals – Facilitate Effective Audit Proposed amounts supported by detailed basis of estimate and
supporting documentation Supporting justification/explanation provided for significant
variances between prior buy actual cost data and proposed amounts
Consolidated Bill of Material Detailed support for additive factors applied to various cost
elements Indirect Rates supported by contractor budgetary or trend data Adequate Support for Subcontractor Proposals
Adequate prime contactor cost or price analysis Adequate subcontract proposal
Proposal reflects anticipated accounting changes
10
Top Reasons for InadequateContractor Proposals
Significant variances between proposed amounts and basis of estimate/supporting documentation (proposed amounts not supported)
Significant variances between prior buy actual cost data and proposed amounts without supporting justification/explanation
Lack of consolidated Bill of MaterialUnsupported additive factors applied to various elements of costs
often leading to duplicate costs proposedRates not based on contractor budgetary or trend data Inadequate Support for Subcontract Proposals
Inadequate prime contractor cost or price analysis Inadequate subcontract proposal
Proposal does not reflect anticipated cost accounting changes
11
Proposal Walk-Through
Includes PCO, ACO & DCAAGain full understanding of contractor’s
proposal/assertionIdentify obvious data omissionsFacilitate early identification of proposal
inadequaciesProcess allows for expediting appropriate action if
proposal is inadequate or other problems requiring contracting officer assistance
Establishment of suspense dates for contractor corrective actions
12
Importance of Proposal Adequacy
Reduces time and resources needed for review of proposal- more efficient use of audit resources
Ensures timely service to the requestorFacilitates contract negotiationsFacilitates accomplishing the contracting
officer’s requirement for ensuring proposal complies with FAR and CAS
13
Notification of Inadequate Proposal
DCAA policy is to always notify the contracting officer as well as the contractor of proposal inadequacies and the necessary actions to make the proposal adequate – this is now earlier and more interactive due to the walk-throughs
Contracting officer has the option to have DCAA go forward on proposal review based on the available information
Going forward may result in additional time, an adverse or disclaimer of opinion and excessive audit resources
The key is to ensure the audit will still provide value to the acquisition process
14
Contractor Support to Facilitatea More Timely Audit Process
Effective contractor proposal walk-throughs
Adequate contractor submissions and assertions
Adequate supporting data in a timely manner and timely access to key contractor personnel responsible for contractor support
Real-time DCAA access to contractor systems
15
Acquisition Example 1
Firm Fixed Priced $176M Proposal for services
Audit questioned $43M$28M related to equipment lease costs
Due to additional audit procedures on this follow-on effort it was determined the contractor was leasing the equipment from a related party
FAR 31.205-36(b)(3) limits the allowable lease costs to the normal costs of ownership
The contractor removed the excess lease costs from its next proposal for two more option years
16
Acquisition Example 2
Firm Fixed Priced $78M Proposal for force protection equipment for troops DCAA identified several inadequacies in the
contractor’s original proposal Revised Proposal submitted for $55M
Audit Questioned $20M due to the contractor’s failure to consider actual cost already incurred
The Army was able to use $15M of the saving to acquire additional equipment
17
Contractor Business Systems
18
Contractor Business Systems
19
Incurred Cost Initiative
Developed a risk-based approach to working down backlog in a effective manner:Increase staffingDedicated audit teams (FAO Manager, Supervisors, and auditors)Revising guidance to perform audits covering multiple contractor years in a single assignment at certain contractorsDeveloped revised incurred cost audit programDelivering an incurred cost auditing refresher training courseContinue working with DoD on strategies to better align the limited DCAA resources to the higher risk contracting areas
20
Continuous ImprovementAd-hoc studying the forward pricing rate evaluation process
with a focus on timely delivery of audited rates High Risk Proposal Team assembled to provide a one –
agency support network focused on quality and timelinessFull participation of proposal walk-throughs to assess
proposal adequacy and understand the basis of estimateEmphasizing annual program plan meetings with contracting
officer and contractor to discuss prioritiesImplementing a project management approach to include
detailed milestone plans to facilitate timely completion of audits
Enhancing the role of the prime contract auditor in coordinating major subcontract proposal audits under major procurements
The use of audit reports on parts of a proposal to help get audit results to the contracting officer more timely
21
Additional information on DCAA and Points of Contact available at
www.dcaa.mil
Defense Contract Audit Agency