Government Contractor Accounting Issues and Contract Holders - A Review
|
|
- Brent Carroll
- 3 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT BUSINESS Defense Acquisition Regulations System Mr. Mark Gomersall, OUSD (AT&L) DPAP (DARS) Crystal Square 4, Suite 200A th Street Arlington, VA Subject: Comments regarding DFARS Case 2009-D038 Dear Mr. Gomersall: Financial Executives International s ( FEI ) Committee on Government Business ( CGB ) appreciates the opportunity to comment on Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement ( DFARS ) Case 2009-D038, which proposes to define contractor business systems and implement compliance enforcement mechanisms in the form of payment withholdings under certain conditions by contracting officers in the Government. FEI is a professional association representing the interests of more than 15,000 chief financial officers, treasurers, controllers, tax directors and other senior financial executives from over 8,000 major companies throughout the United States and Canada. FEI represents both the providers and users of financial information. CGB formulates policy opinions on government contracting issues for FEI in line with the views of the membership. This letter represents the views of the Committee on Government Business. The CGB membership has participated in creating and reviewing the Council of Defense and Space Industry Associations (CODSIA) as well as the Aerospace Industries Association (AIA) comment letters being submitted regarding this proposed rule. The CGB concurs with those industry positions and recommendations. Rather than reiterating the points discussed in the aforementioned comment letters, below we offer additional commentary regarding accounting systems as well as contract withholds as addressed in the proposed rule to be considered. Comments on Accounting System Criteria The eighteen separate criteria listed in the proposed rule for what would constitute an acceptable accounting system for Government contracting purposes represent in theory what all government contractors strive to achieve. However, we are concerned that the rule as it is currently constituted could be challenging for contractors to demonstrate compliance due to the subjective nature of interpreting the criteria as drafted. This challenge would be significantly increased if there were differences of opinion between contractors and auditors on 1) whether the goal of the rule was absolute or reasonable assurance, 2) the application of materiality considerations and 3) utilization of cost-benefit analysis. As a result, we recommend that these be directly addressed in the final rule to avoid unintended consequences (e.g., higher cost of compliance than necessary).
2 Page 2 of 7 An unclear rule could cause the implementation to result in effects that are contrary to the Guiding Principles found in FAR Part 1 as noted below; FAR Part (b)(1) In order to ensure that maximum efficiency is obtained, rules, regulations, and policies should be promulgated only when their benefits clearly exceed the costs of their development, implementation, administration, and enforcement. This applies to internal administrative processes, including reviews, and to rules and procedures applied to the contractor community. FAR Part (c)(2) To achieve efficient operations, the System must shift its focus from risk avoidance to one of risk management. The cost to the taxpayer of attempting to eliminate all risk is prohibitive. The Executive Branch will accept and manage the risk associated with empowering local procurement officials to take independent action based on their professional judgment. The interplay between the objectives of internal controls, their cost and benefit, as well as the risk of control failures is a balance that industry continually addresses. This has been particularly evident in recent years by the compliance with the internal control provisions of the Sarbanes- Oxley Act of 2002 that publically traded companies must follow in connection with their internal controls over financial reporting. Industry practices coincide with the FAR Guiding principles for risk management with respect to internal control systems. In our view recently published guidance from the DCAA (Defense Contract Audit Agency) as discussed further in these comments suggests a risk avoidance approach, deeming all deficiencies that are found related system control objectives as significant. Control systems within an accounting environment may take different forms and have different attributes such as manual, automated, preventive and detective controls. The design and cost of each control should be based upon the potential risk associated with the objective that is being addressed. The lower the tolerance for risk in establishing the controls the higher the cost to develop, implement and maintain those systems. The confluence of this proposed rule together with the DCAA guidance that is focused on risk avoidance rather than risk management has the potential of significantly increasing the cost of business systems at contractors which is passed on to the Government, without corresponding benefit to the taxpayer or war fighter over the long run. With regard to some of the specific criteria included in the rule for Accounting Systems criterion number 8 requires "Periodic monitoring of the system" without a definition of what the expectation or frequency of the reviews should be with this rule. Monitoring is a fundamental and important aspect of any internal control system. As written, the rule does not recognize leading practices that are being implemented in industry through automated continuous monitoring and exception
3 Page 3 of 7 reporting in areas where those types of reviews can be applied. In recognition of the various ways in which monitoring systems can be implemented, we recommend the word periodic be eliminated from the criteria. Accounting system criteria number 12 requires the system to exclude unallowable costs in accordance with FAR and contract terms from government contracts. Contractors have established elaborate systems and controls to capture and exclude these costs. Contractors certify annually to the best of their knowledge that unallowable costs are excluded from their billings. However, based on the nature of these costs, at times they will avoid established controls. This is typically due to either human error or changes to prior interpretations and definitions in the nature of these costs by either contractors, the Government or the Courts. In establishing CAS 405 (Accounting for Unallowable Costs) the CAS Board provided guidance that this rule was to be implemented with reason. Specifically within the preambles to the publication of CAS 405 the board made the following statement: With regard to the stated concern about overzealous implementation auditors and contracting officers, the Board has previously stated that the administration of its rules, regulation and Cost Accounting Standards should be reasonable. The Board anticipates that this rule of reason will be applied in the implementation of this Standard. Thus, where a good faith effort has been made by a contractor, in the development and implementation of his cost accounting rules, procedure and practices, to provide for identification of expressly unallowable costs, it is intended that inadvertent failure to properly classify a particular item of cost will not be regarded as a noncompliance Despite this basis on which the rule was to be implemented, auditors routinely will issue CAS 405 noncompliance audit reports when they encounter these issues as part of other reviews (typically incurred cost audits) irrespective of whether the company disagrees with the auditors interpretation, or the cost represented an inadvertent error or is immaterial in amount. Previously these immaterial audit issues have been resolved between contracting officers and contractors, in accordance with the normal cadence of business activity. Under the proposed rule these previously immaterial issues may now be considered significant as they will constitute deficiencies resulting in withholds and disputes. Therefore we recommend this criterion be eliminated from the proposed rule since remedies already exist for contracting officers to protect the Government s interest through the application of the CAS (Cost Accounting Standards) administration clause, as well as the FAR (Federal Acquisition Regulation) Allowable Cost and Payment clause at , for this aspect of contractor accounting practices. Accounting system criteria number 17 introduces the subjective and undefined terms "Adequate" and "Reliable" with respect to accounting systems providing data to be used to support follow-on acquisitions (proposals). CAS (Cost Accounting Standards) covered contractors already have the requirements from CAS 401 to disclose, bid and collect costs in a consistent fashion. Effectively this criterion is tying the basis of estimates (BOEs) for proposals to the accounting system, which is in our view inappropriate. The ability to articulate the nuanced difference between accounting transactions and proposal BOE rationale is not something that should be the subject of a FAR
4 Page 4 of 7 clause or part of the terms in our contracts. This criterion will effectively eliminate a contractor s prerogative or ability to establish the level of appropriate accounting for transactions without the consent of the regulators. The proposed rule has established contractor estimating systems as one of the six business systems that would be subject to withholds. The criteria in that portion of the rule have been established to insure estimating systems are working correctly. Inserting this criterion within the accounting system in our view is redundant and should be deleted. We view inclusion of this criterion as inequitable as it could lead to potentially a double counting of a single condition as two deficiencies first in the Accounting and then second in the Estimating system effectively doubling up of withholds for that single condition. Furthermore the rule does not allow for the adjudication of disputes prior to the implementation of withholds. Accounting system criteria number 18 requires contractor accounting practices to be in accordance with CAS (Cost Accounting Standards) and GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Principles). Most major contractors that are subject to CAS and DCAA oversight have ongoing disagreements or disputes regarding the interpretation and implementation of the CAS in their practices. It is not unusual for the DCAA in their audit reports to cite a contractor for an inadequacy in their systems, due to the contractor implementing CAS in a fashion that is not in agreement with the DCAA view. In certain circumstances even reasonable people cannot come to an agreement, which in the case of Government contracting leads to the courts for a decision. Contractors should not be subject to the undesirable effects of contract withholds on matters of disputed interpretation which await the decision of the judiciary. In the event of an adverse decision to a contractor, the Government s position is protected through an interest assessment that would be applied to the matter at hand. In the case of these withholds in the event of an adverse decision to the Government, contractors would have suffered the undesirable effects of limited cash flow, throughout what is typically a lengthy litigation process. Comments on Risk and Materiality Considerations within Accounting systems DoD in the response to public commentary stressed the importance of materiality (item 33). DoD disagrees with the assertion that business systems will be deemed inadequate and payments held for minor deficiencies. DoD also asserted (item 4) that it is the policy of DCAA to report only deficiencies determined to be significant deficiencies or material weaknesses. However, in actual practice that assertion conflicts with published guidance issued by the DCAA, (reference December 19, 2008 MRD titled audit Guidance on Significant Deficiencies/material Weaknesses and Audit opinions on Internal Control Systems). This guidance instructs the auditor in clear terms that anything which is subject to DCAA review should be considered significant. The guidance states: It is not necessary to demonstrate actual questioned cost to report a significant deficiency/material weakness. In addition, by limiting internal control audits to major contractors, DCAA only performs audits of contractor systems that are material to Government contract costs. As a result, internal control deficiencies identified in DCAA audits will generally have an impact or potential impact
5 Page 5 of 7 to Government contract costs that is material. Therefore, a contractor s failure to accomplish any applicable control objective should be reported as a significant deficiency/material weakness. The Internal Control Integrated Framework published by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) is the most widely used framework in the U.S. for designing and implementing effective internal controls. COSO recognizes that resources always have constraints, and entities must consider the relative costs and benefits of establishing controls. COSO also acknowledges that an internal control system, no matter how well conceived and operated, can provide only reasonable not absolute assurance to management and the board The clear record as published by the DCAA headquarters guidance is an expectation of perfection, which is contrary to not only the COSO internal control framework, but also to the commentary from DoD in the proposed rule and existing language in FAR Part (c)(2). This divergence of interpretation between good business practice, the published policy of DoD and the DCAA will create inefficiency in the process and add unnecessary cost to contractor systems not commensurate with the risk associated with deficiencies as they are perceived by the DCAA. Therefore we recommend that materiality and significant deficiency be defined in the proposed rule to avoid unintended consequences in implementation. Comments on punitive remedies within Subpart (g) Mitigating the risk of accounting system deficiencies on specific proposals Within the commentary in the Federal register on this proposed rule (item 32) regarding the Legality of Withholds, the point is made that: DoD is relying on the temporary percentage withholds, not as a penalty for a deficiency, but as representing a good-faith estimate sufficient to mitigate the Government s risk, where the actual amounts are difficult to estimate or quantify. However Subpart (g) in this proposed rule introduces a punitive step whereby contracting officers can permanently decrement profit or fee on a proposal. A Contracting Officer could also unilaterally adjust contract prices where reopener clauses have been mandated on proposals under this new regime. Given the subjective nature and the application of judgment that will be applied in the Contracting Officers decisions for this rule, there should be additional language inserted into this subpart that would require the auditor s or functional specialist s report to the contracting officer to describe the deficiencies in sufficient detail to allow a full understanding of the deficiencies and the potential adverse impact to the Government. This report should estimate a discrete potential dollar impact of each cited deficiency, so the risk to the government can be quantified and assessed on an individual basis. The auditor should be required to list the criteria on which he based his conclusions. In the absence of this further requirement on the auditor or functional specialist, this subpart should be deleted from the final rule as it will lead to unnecessary disputes and is punitive to contractors beyond other measures already included in this rule.
6 Page 6 of 7 Comments on contract withholds in the revised proposed rule. The CGB appreciates the reduction in withhold rates in this proposed rule from the prior version. However, the lack of dollar limitations at the contract level will clearly lead to withholds that grossly exceed the amount required to protect the interests of the U.S. Government. The proposed rule also fails to provide oversight when contracting officers direct withholds and do not evaluate corrective action plans in a timely manner. In order to ensure consistency and equitable treatment of contractors we recommend that the value withheld at the contract level be limited to $100,000 until authorization is received from DCMA headquarters to go beyond the limit. Furthermore DCMA headquarters authorization should be required at each of the following subsequent withhold thresholds: $250,000, $500,000, $1,000,000 and every million thereafter. The requirement to receive approval to go beyond specified limits will protect the contractor in situations when DCMA and DCAA lack the resources to perform reviews of corrective action plans or risk assessments in a timely manner. There would be benefit to a higher level approval as it would provide an escalation avenue to contractors when relations at the local level are strained. The approval of withholds above $100,000 by headquarters should be based on evidence that actual risk or harm in excess of the limit exists. An approval process will also provide DCMA headquarters with better insight on amounts being withheld which will ensure equitable treatment of contractors, helping to avoid Contract Dispute Claims, and identify situations when contractors may be at financial risk. The proposed rule also does not clearly address how contractors recover withheld amounts associated with a business system deficiency that is corrected but not before a deficiency in another business systems is identified. To avoid the potential for perpetual withholdings the proposed rule needs to provide guidance for releasing withholds in situations when deficiencies on multiple business systems overlap and the timing of corrective action plans differ. If perpetual withholds are experienced, and no actual harm takes place, industry believes there will be a basis to require prompt payment interest penalties as the exemption provided by law was intended for withholds taken for a limited time Comments on Applicability of Withholds by Contract Type: Within the FY 2011 National Defense Authorization Act, there is specific language with respect to the applicability of this proposed rule by contract type. Section 893(f)(3) defines a covered contract as follows: (3) The term covered contract means a cost reimbursement contract, incentive type contract, time and materials contract or labor-hour contract that could be affected if the data produced by a contractor business system has a significant deficiency. Accordingly the proposed rule must be adjusted to specifically exclude those contract types including Firm Fixed Price Contracts that have been discretely excluded by the Authorization Act. In closing the CGB has concerns that the proposed rule as written will lead to an increase in the cost of business systems without a commensurate benefit for that investment. The lack of due
7 Page 7 of 7 process, undefined terms, and the subjective and qualitative nature of this rule will manifest with irreconcilable differences of opinion between contractors and the Government potentially increasing disputes and litigation in this area. We appreciate your consideration of these matters and welcome the opportunity to discuss any and all related matters. FEI staff and business leaders from FEI s member companies are available to speak on any of these issues. If you or your staff should have any questions feel free to contact Matt Miller, Senior Director, Government Affairs at Sincerely, Paul J. Cienki Chairman FEI Committee on Government Business
Evaluation of Defense Contract Management Agency Actions on Reported DoD Contractor Business System Deficiencies
Inspector General U.S. Department of Defense Report No. DODIG-2016-001 OCTOBER 1, 2015 Evaluation of Defense Contract Management Agency Actions on Reported DoD Contractor Business System Deficiencies INTEGRITY
More informationThe Devil is in the Details Compliance with the Business Systems Rule
Metropolitan Area Corporate Counsel Association WMACCA Conference on Ethics and Compliance for Government Contractors The Devil is in the Details Compliance with the Business Systems Rule April 1, 2014
More informationDOECAA Spring Conference Presentation. Cost Reimbursement Contracting Issues - DOE Proposed Business System Rule
DOECAA Spring Conference Presentation Cost Reimbursement Contracting Issues - DOE Proposed Business System Rule Mary Karen Wills, CPA Director/Leader, BRG Government Contracts 2014 Berkeley Research Group
More informationDepartment of Defense INSTRUCTION
Department of Defense INSTRUCTION NUMBER 7640.02 April 15, 2015 IG DoD SUBJECT: Policy for Follow-Up on Contract Audit Reports References: See Enclosure 1 1. PURPOSE. This instruction reissues DoD Instruction
More informationMaster Document Audit Program. Business System Deficiency Report Assignment. Version No. 1.3, dated June 2014 B-1 Planning Considerations
Activity Code 11090 B-1 Planning Considerations Business System Deficiency Report Assignment Audit Specific Independence Determination Members of the audit team and internal specialists consulting on this
More informationGovernment Accounting, Estimating, and Billing Systems: Pitfalls and Answers
Curtis Matthews, Managing Partner Government Accounting, Estimating, and Billing Systems: Pitfalls and Answers Findley Gillespie, Senior Manager May 18, 2011 1 The material appearing in this presentation
More informationINSTRUCTION NUMBER 7640.02 August 22, 2008
Department of Defense INSTRUCTION NUMBER 7640.02 August 22, 2008 IG DoD SUBJECT: Policy for Follow-up on Contract Audit Reports References: See Enclosure 1 1. PURPOSE. This Instruction: a. Reissues DoD
More informationStrategic Implications of the New DFARS Business System Rule Co-presented by Venable LLP and Argy, Wiltse & Robinson June 12, 2012
Strategic Implications of the New DFARS Business System Rule Co-presented by Venable LLP and Argy, Wiltse & Robinson June 12, 2012 1 Panelists Robert A. ( Rob ) Burton, Partner, Venable LLP A 30-year veteran
More informationPAS 730.3.B.2.4 April 24, 2012 12-PAS-012(R)
DEFENSE CONTRACT AUDIT AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 8725 JOHN J. KINGMAN ROAD, SUITE 2135 FORT BELVOIR, VA 22060-6219 IN REPLY REFER TO April 24, 2012 MEMORANDUM FOR REGIONAL DIRECTORS, DCAA DIRECTOR,
More informationWhat Exactly is an Acceptable Accounting System?
What Exactly is an Acceptable Accounting System? Kristen Soles, CPA Member Stephanie Widzinski, CPA Senior Manager September 27, 2012 Agenda Review DFARS Business System Rule What Agency is Responsible
More informationFocus. FEATURE COMMENT: Legal, Accounting And Practical Considerations In Responding To DCAA Audits Of Contractor Internal Controls Systems
Reprinted from The Government Contractor, with permission of Thomson Reuters. Copyright 2010. Further use without the permission of West is prohibited. For further information about this publication, please
More informationGAO DEFENSE CONTRACT AUDITS. Actions Needed to Improve DCAA's Access to and Use of Defense Company Internal Audit Reports
GAO United States Government Accountability Office Report to the Committee on Armed Services, U.S. Senate December 2011 DEFENSE CONTRACT AUDITS Actions Needed to Improve DCAA's Access to and Use of Defense
More informationTestimony. Patrick J. Fitzgerald Director, Defense Contract Audit Agency. before the. Commission on Wartime Contracting In Iraq and Afghanistan
Testimony of Patrick J. Fitzgerald Director, Defense Contract Audit Agency before the Commission on Wartime Contracting In Iraq and Afghanistan July 26, 2010 Chairman Thibault, Chairman Shays, and members
More informationHotline Complaint Regarding the Defense Contract Audit Agency Examination of a Contractor s Subcontract Costs
Inspector General U.S. Department of Defense Report No. DODIG-2015-061 DECEMBER 23, 2014 Hotline Complaint Regarding the Defense Contract Audit Agency Examination of a Contractor s Subcontract Costs INTEGRITY
More informationInside The Proposed DFARS Business Systems Rule
Portfolio Media. Inc. 860 Broadway, 6th Floor New York, NY 10003 www.law360.com Phone: +1 646 783 7100 Fax: +1 646 783 7161 customerservice@law360.com Inside The Proposed DFARS Business s Rule Law360,
More informationGovernment Contractor Business Systems and Overview of System Assessments
Government Contractor Business Systems and Overview of System Assessments Agenda Overview of business systems rules and environment today 3 rd party assessments Practical solutions Contractor perspective
More informationDEFENSE CONTRACT AUDIT AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 8725 JOHN J. KINGMAN ROAD, SUITE 2135 FORT BELVOIR, VA 22060-6219
DEFENSE CONTRACT AUDIT AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 8725 JOHN J. KINGMAN ROAD, SUITE 2135 FORT BELVOIR, VA 22060-6219 IN REPLY REFER TO PSP 730.8.B.1/2010-003 February 18, 2011 11-PSP-003(R) MEMORANDUM
More informationQUALITY CONTROL REVIEW REPORT
IG-02-007 QUALITY CONTROL REVIEW REPORT ERNST & YOUNG LLP AND DEFENSE CONTRACT AUDIT AGENCY AUDIT OF SOUTHWEST RESEARCH INSTITUTE, FISCAL YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 24, 1999 January 23, 2002 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR
More informationSeptember 15, 2014 VIA REGULATORY PORTAL AND ELECTRONIC MAIL
1601 K St. NW Washington, DC 20006 (202) 778-9428 VIA REGULATORY PORTAL AND ELECTRONIC MAIL Mr. Mark Gomersall OUSD (AT&L), DPAP(DARS), Room 3B941 3060 Defense Pentagon Washington, DC 20301-3060 Re: Proposed
More informationPost Award Accounting System Audit at Nonmajor Contractors
Activity Code 17741 Version 3.1, dated November 2015 B-01 Planning Considerations Post Award Accounting System Audit at Nonmajor Contractors Audit Specific Independence Determination Members of the audit
More informationFederal Regulatory Compliance Best Practices Washington Technology Webcast. September 27, 2012
Federal Regulatory Compliance Best Practices Washington Technology Webcast September 27, 2012 Agenda Topic Minutes Regulatory compliance overview 5 Major areas of financial compliance risk 15 Best practices
More informationThe Cost Accounting Standards and Consequences of Noncompliance
The Cost Accounting Standards and Consequences of Noncompliance Breakout Session E05 Greg Bingham, Vice President, The Kenrich Group LLC Mike LaCorte, Principal, The Kenrich Group LLC Tuesday, December
More informationAccounting System Requirements
Accounting System Requirements Further information is available in the Information for Contractors Manual under Enclosure 2 The views expressed in this presentation are DCAA's views and not necessarily
More informationWELCOME. Accounting Systems for DOD Contracts
WELCOME Accounting Systems for DOD Contracts Moderator: Layli Pietri, Small Business Manager, Balfour Beatty Construction Speaker: Kay Papin, Government Compliance Manager, McCarthy Group Inc. Accounting
More informationUNIT 34: COST ACCOUNTING STANDARDS
UNIT CERTIFICATION Statement of Completion has satisfactorily completed training in the duty of this Unit under the conditions described below and in accordance with the overall standard(s) for this Unit.
More informationThe Changing Government Contractor Environment
The Changing Government Contractor Environment 1 Federal Government Contracting DCAA FY 2014 Report to Congress DCAA Audit Guidance Business systems Federal regulatory rule changes State Contracting (Dept.
More informationOracle Applications Compliance Statement for a Materials Management and Accounting System (MMAS)
Oracle Applications Compliance Statement for a Materials Management and Accounting System (MMAS) An Oracle White Paper September 1999 Revised November 27, 2001 Oracle Applications Compliance Statement
More informationTHE DCAA AUDIT BECOMING DCAA COMPLIANT
THE DCAA AUDIT Created to oversee government spending on behalf of the American tax-payer, the Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) is responsible for supervising all Department of Defense (DoD) contracts.
More informationGUIDELINES INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS PERFORMING FINANCIAL STATEMENT AUDITS OF STATE AGENCIES
GUIDELINES TO INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS PERFORMING FINANCIAL STATEMENT AUDITS OF STATE AGENCIES STATE AUDITOR Robert R. Peterson 1 GUIDELINES TO CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS PERFORMING FINANCIAL
More informationTREASURY INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR TAX ADMINISTRATION
TREASURY INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR TAX ADMINISTRATION The Internal Revenue Service September 14, 2010 Reference Number: 2010-10-115 This report has cleared the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration
More informationMaster Document Audit Program. Version 1.5, dated September 2015 B-01 Planning Considerations
Activity Code 11070 Version 1.5, dated September 2015 B-01 Planning Considerations Accounting System Audit Audit Specific Independence Determination Members of the audit team and internal specialists consulting
More informationOAIG-AUD (ATTN: AFTS Audit Suggestions) Inspector General of the Department of Defense 400 Army Navy Drive (Room 801) Arlington, VA 22202-4704
Additional Copies The Office of Audit Policy and Oversight, Office of the Assistant Inspector General for Auditing of the Department of Defense, prepared this report. To obtain additional copies of this
More informationBusiness Systems: Update on Proposed Rules
Business Systems: Update on Proposed Rules Presented By: Mark Burroughs, Partner Topics Review of Business System requirements Observations on areas of focus by the government Enforcement of significant
More informationPAC 730.3.B.03/2012-07 April 24, 2014 14-PAC-005(R) MEMORANDUM FOR REGIONAL DIRECTORS, DCAA HEADS OF PRINCIPAL STAFF ELEMENTS, HQ, DCAA
DEFENSE CONTRACT AUDIT AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 8725 JOHN J. KINGMAN ROAD, SUITE 2135 FORT BELVOIR, VA 22060-6219 IN REPLY REFER TO PAC 730.3.B.03/2012-07 April 24, 2014 14-PAC-005(R) MEMORANDUM FOR
More informationContractor Purchasing System Review (CPSR)
Contractor Purchasing System Review (CPSR) Presentation References FAR 44.3 and DFARS 244.3 -- Contractors Purchasing Systems Reviews Consent to Subcontract FAR 44.2 2 What is a CPSR Contractor purchasing
More informationStatement of Mr. William H. Reed Director, Defense Contract Audit Agency Senate Armed Services Committee April 19, 2007
1 Statement of Mr. William H. Reed Director, Defense Contract Audit Agency Senate Armed Services Committee April 19, 2007 Mr. Chairman, members of the Committee, my statement will summarize the Defense
More informationSPECIAL INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR IRAQ RECONSTRUCTION LETTER FOR DIRECTOR, DEFENSE CONTRACT MANAGEMENT AGENCY DIRECTOR, DEFENSE CONTRACT AUDIT AGENCY
SPECIAL INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR IRAQ RECONSTRUCTION LETTER FOR DIRECTOR, DEFENSE CONTRACT MANAGEMENT AGENCY DIRECTOR, DEFENSE CONTRACT AUDIT AGENCY July 30, 2012 SUBJECT: Gaps in Business System Reviews
More informationDCAA Perspective: Key Subcontracting Practices for Maintaining Approved Business Systems Accounting System and Estimating System
DCAA Perspective: Key Subcontracting Practices for Maintaining Approved Business Systems Accounting System and Estimating System Breakout Session A Alfred J. Massey, Western Region, Special Programs Manager,
More informationCOUNCIL OF DEFENSE AND SPACE INDUSTRY ASSOCIATIONS 4401 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 1110 Arlington, Virginia 22203 703-875-8059
COUNCIL OF DEFENSE AND SPACE INDUSTRY ASSOCIATIONS 4401 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 1110 Arlington, Virginia 22203 703-875-8059 Defense Acquisition Regulations System Attn: Mr. Mark Gomersall OUSD (AT&L),
More informationMaryland Health Insurance Plan
Audit Report Maryland Health Insurance Plan April 2012 OFFICE OF LEGISLATIVE AUDITS DEPARTMENT OF LEGISLATIVE SERVICES MARYLAND GENERAL ASSEMBLY This report and any related follow-up correspondence are
More informationReview of Audits Issued by the Defense Contract Audit Agency in FY 2012 and FY 2013
Report No. DODIG-2014-109 Inspector General U.S. Department of Defense SEPTEMBER 8, 2014 Review of Audits Issued by the Defense Contract Audit Agency in FY 2012 and FY 2013 INTEGRITY EFFICIENCY ACCOUNTABILITY
More informationDefense Contract Audit Agency: What Do They Do and How Does It Affect ME as a Resource Manager? (Breakout #63)
Defense Contract Audit Agency: What Do They Do and How Does It Affect ME as a Resource Manager? (Breakout #63) Pat Fitzgerald Director Defense Contract Audit Agency The views expressed in this presentation
More informationDCAA Contract Audit Manual
D(1) APPENDIX D Table of Contents Paragraph Page D-000 Technical Specialist Assistance D-001 Scope... D1 D-100 Section 1 --- Deciding Whether Technical Specialist Assistance is Needed D-101 General...
More informationGUIDELINE NO. 22 REGULATORY AUDITS OF ENERGY BUSINESSES
Level 37, 2 Lonsdale Street Melbourne 3000, Australia Telephone.+61 3 9302 1300 +61 1300 664 969 Facsimile +61 3 9302 1303 GUIDELINE NO. 22 REGULATORY AUDITS OF ENERGY BUSINESSES ENERGY INDUSTRIES JANUARY
More informationGordon S. Heddell Acting Inspector General Department of Defense. before the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee
September 10, 2008 Expected Release 10:00 a.m. Gordon S. Heddell Acting Inspector General Department of Defense before the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee on Expediency Versus
More informationOffice of the Inspector General Department of Defense
CONTRACT MANAGEMENT FOR THE NATIONAL DEFENSE CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL EXCELLENCE Report No. D-2000-188 September 14, 2000 This special version of the report has been revised to omit contractor sensitive
More informationQ Srnithsonian Institution
Q Srnithsonian Institution Office of the Inspector General March 3 1,2008 Audit and Review Committee Board of Regents Smithsonian Institution Washington, D.C. 20560 Dear Members of the Audit and Review
More informationU.S. Department of Energy Office of Inspector General Office of Audit Services. Audit Report. Selected Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Projects
U.S. Department of Energy Office of Inspector General Office of Audit Services Audit Report Selected Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Projects DOE/IG-0689 May 2005 SELECTED ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND
More informationDCAA Audit R 4 Rights to Records, Requirements & Remedies
San Diego Chapters Present DCAA Audit R 4 Rights to Records, Requirements & Remedies A Seminar with Panel Discussion and Audience Participation February 18, 2009 This Morning s Agenda 8:30 Introduction
More informationHow To Manage Risk At Atb Financial
Guidelines for Financial Institutions Legislative Compliance Management (LCM) Date: July 2004 Introduction Regulatory risk is the risk of non-compliance with applicable regulatory requirements. For the
More informationGOVERNMENT CONTRACT COSTS, PRICING & ACCOUNTING REPORT
Reprinted with permission from Government Contract Costs, Pricing & Accounting Report, Volume 10, Issue 2, K2015 Thomson Reuters. Further reproduction without permission of the publisher is prohibited.
More informationDepartment of Veterans Affairs
Audit Report Department of Veterans Affairs December 2013 OFFICE OF LEGISLATIVE AUDITS DEPARTMENT OF LEGISLATIVE SERVICES MARYLAND GENERAL ASSEMBLY This report and any related follow-up correspondence
More informationCOLLECTIVE INVESTMENT LAW DIFC LAW No. 2 of 2010
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- COLLECTIVE INVESTMENT LAW DIFC LAW No. 2 of 2010 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
More informationCONTRACT ADMINISTRATION AND MANAGEMENT GUIDE
CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION AND MANAGEMENT GUIDE STATE OF IDAHO DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION DIVISION OF PURCHASING REVISED 01 01 14 Table of Contents I. Purpose... 1 II. Overview of Contract Management and
More informationUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL AUDIT SERVICES August 24, 2015 Control Number ED-OIG/A04N0004 James W. Runcie Chief Operating Officer U.S. Department of Education Federal
More informationAudit of Controls Over Contract Payments FINAL AUDIT REPORT
Audit of Controls Over Contract Payments FINAL AUDIT REPORT ED-OIG/A07-A0015 March 2001 Our mission is to promote the efficient U.S. Department of Education and effective use of taxpayer dollars Office
More informationCHAPTER 8. Table of Contents
July 29, 2015 8(1) Paragraph CHAPTER 8 Table of Contents 8-000 Cost Accounting Standards Page 8-001 Scope of Chapter... 801 8-100 Section 1 --- Overview - Cost Accounting Standards Board (CASB) Rules and
More informationAccounting System Requirements
Basic Financial Requirements for Government Contracting The views expressed in this presentation are DCAA's views and not necessarily the views of other DoD organizations Accounting System Requirements
More informationAs the Department of Defense looks for ways to
Reprinted from Government Contract Costs, Pricing & Accounting Report, with permission of Thomson Reuters. Further use without the permission of West is prohibited. For further information about this publication
More informationMEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING Between Defense Contract Audit Agency and Department of Homeland Security
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING Between Defense Contract Audit Agency and Department of Homeland Security 1. PURPOSE This memorandum sets forth an understanding of contract audit coverage and related audit
More informationMEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING Between Defense Contract Audit Agency and Department of Homeland Security
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING Between Defense Contract Audit Agency and Department of Homeland Security 1. PURPOSE This memorandum sets forth an understanding of contract audit coverage and related audit
More informationBOTTOMLINE TECHNOLOGIES (DE), INC. AUDIT COMMITTEE CHARTER
BOTTOMLINE TECHNOLOGIES (DE), INC. AUDIT COMMITTEE CHARTER A. Purpose The purpose of the Audit Committee is to assist the Board of Directors oversight of: the Company s accounting and financial reporting
More informationThe principal purposes of the Audit Committee ( Committee ) of the Board of Directors ( Board ) of CSRA Inc. (the Company ) are to:
CSRA Inc. AUDIT COMMITTEE CHARTER (EFFECTIVE December 16, 2015) I. PURPOSES OF THE COMMITTEE The principal purposes of the Audit Committee ( Committee ) of the Board of Directors ( Board ) of CSRA Inc.
More informationDCAA Guidelines. How the SBIR firm can work effectively with the Defense Contract Audit Agency
DCAA Guidelines How the SBIR firm can work effectively with the Defense Contract Audit Agency Today s Presenters OUTLINE Presenter Introduction DCAA & DCMA DCAA Overview Types of DCAA Audits What it takes
More informationDCAA Initiatives/Current Issues
Defense Contract Audit Agency DCAA Initiatives/Current Issues Maryland Association of CPAs 2010 Government Contractors' Conference September 21, 2010 Kenneth J. Saccoccia Assistant Director Policy and
More informationCONTACT: 1. Proposed rule BDO GOVERNMENT CONTRACTING PRACTICE GUIDANCE ON THE PROPOSED DOE BUSINESS SYSTEM RULE
BDO GOVERNMENT CONTRACTING PRACTICE GUIDANCE ON THE PROPOSED DOE BUSINESS SYSTEM RULE By Eric Sobota, Kelley Doran and Barron Avery Contractors that work for the Department of Energy (DOE) under agreements
More informationThe Auditor s Communication With Those Charged With Governance
The Auditor s Communication With Governance 2083 AU Section 380 The Auditor s Communication With Those Charged With Governance (Supersedes SAS No. 61.) Source: SAS No. 114. Effective for audits of financial
More informationCurrent Initiatives May 2015
DHG 20 th Annual Government Contracting Update Current Initiatives May 2015 Mr. Ken Saccoccia Deputy Director Page 1 One Agency One Mission DCAA Overview Priorities and Better Buying Power Small Business
More informationDCAA New Tactics in Obtaining Contractor Internal audit reports
DCAA New Tactics in Obtaining Contractor Internal audit reports By Todd Bishop and David Eck, CPA In August 2012, the Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) issued updates to its policy guidance and the
More informationUniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards AT 2 CFR 200
Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards AT 2 CFR 200 November 11, 2014 WHAT S CHANGING AND WHEN? Grants Reform Office of Management and Budget Circulars
More informationDoD Methodologies to Identify Improper Payments in the Military Health Benefits and Commercial Pay Programs Need Improvement
Report No. DODIG-2015-068 I nspec tor Ge ne ral U.S. Department of Defense JA N UA RY 1 4, 2 0 1 5 DoD Methodologies to Identify Improper Payments in the Military Health Benefits and Commercial Pay Programs
More informationMACPA 2014 Government Contractors Conference. Current Accounting Issues
MACPA 2014 Government Contractors Conference Current Accounting Issues Jim Thomas Partner, September 18, 2014 Agenda 1. Current Environment 2. Regulatory Update 3. DCMA and DCAA Recent Guidance and Key
More informationPre-Award Accounting Systems
Pre-Award Accounting Systems 2013 National SBIR Conference Christopher Andrezze, CPA Special Assistant to the Deputy Director May 16, 2013 The views expressed in this presentation are DCAA's views and
More informationPAC 730.8.A.05/2008-04 April 10, 2008
DEFENSE CONTRACT AUDIT AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 8725 JOHN J. KINGMAN ROAD, SUITE 2135 FORT BELVOIR, VA 22060-6219 IN REPLY REFER TO PAC 730.8.A.05/2008-04 April 10, 2008 Ms. Laura Auletta Cost Accounting
More informationSALESFORCE.COM, INC. CHARTER OF THE AUDIT AND FINANCE COMMITTEE OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS. (Revised September 11, 2012)
I. STATEMENT OF POLICY SALESFORCE.COM, INC. CHARTER OF THE AUDIT AND FINANCE COMMITTEE OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS (Revised September 11, 2012) This Charter specifies the scope of the responsibilities of
More informationGuidelines for Guardians ad Litem for Children in Family Court
Guidelines for Guardians ad Litem for Children in Family Court Preamble The following are guidelines for attorneys and non-lawyer volunteers appointed as guardians ad litem for children in most family
More informationGC GUIDANCE ON INHERENTLY GOVERNMENTAL FUNCTIONS
GC GUIDANCE ON INHERENTLY GOVERNMENTAL FUNCTIONS Federal law prohibits contractors from performing inherently governmental functions. But determining which functions may be performed by contractors and
More informationIf you require a copy of this presentation, please provide your contact information to either Christopher Weir or Bob Eyer and we will be sure to
How do I survive an audit of an incurred cost submission? If you require a copy of this presentation, please provide your contact information to either Christopher Weir or Bob Eyer and we will be sure
More informationEarned Value Management Knowledge Sharing
www.pwc.com Earned Value Management Knowledge Sharing IFS Customer Summit 2011 Laura Ayres April 12, 2011 Agenda - EVM Defined - EVM Regulatory Requirements & Industry Standards - Current EVM Environment
More informationSTATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA PERFORMANCE AUDIT DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES DIVISION OF MEDICAL ASSISTANCE MEDICAID PROVIDER ELIGIBILITY AUGUST 2014 OFFICE OF THE STATE AUDITOR BETH A. WOOD, CPA
More informationCHARTER OF THE AUDIT COMMITTEE OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF SERVICEMASTER GLOBAL HOLDINGS, INC.
CHARTER OF THE AUDIT COMMITTEE OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF SERVICEMASTER GLOBAL HOLDINGS, INC. Adopted by the Board of Directors on July 24, 2007; and as amended June 13, 2014. Pursuant to duly adopted
More informationCapital Adequacy: Advanced Measurement Approaches to Operational Risk
Prudential Standard APS 115 Capital Adequacy: Advanced Measurement Approaches to Operational Risk Objective and key requirements of this Prudential Standard This Prudential Standard sets out the requirements
More informationJuly 6, 2015 11(1) CHAPTER 11
July 6, 2015 11(1) CHAPTER 11 Table of Contents Paragraph Page 11-000 Audit of Contractor Compliance with Contract Financial Management Requirements 11-001 Scope of Chapter... 1101 11-100 Section 1 ---
More informationWorkers Compensation Commission
Audit Report Workers Compensation Commission March 2009 OFFICE OF LEGISLATIVE AUDITS DEPARTMENT OF LEGISLATIVE SERVICES MARYLAND GENERAL ASSEMBLY This report and any related follow-up correspondence are
More informationBasic Financial Requirements for Government Contracting
Basic Financial Requirements for Government Contracting 2014 National SBIR/STTR Conference The views expressed in this presentation are DCAA's views and not necessarily the views of other DoD organizations
More informationOMB Uniform Guidance Procurement Standards Pilot Worthy?
Federal Demonstration Partnership May 13, 2014 OMB Uniform Guidance Procurement Standards Pilot Worthy? Prepared by: Office of Naval Research Debbie Rafi, Director, University Business Affairs Abe Sabbag,
More informationMICHIGAN AUDIT REPORT OFFICE OF THE AUDITOR GENERAL THOMAS H. MCTAVISH, C.P.A. AUDITOR GENERAL
MICHIGAN OFFICE OF THE AUDITOR GENERAL AUDIT REPORT THOMAS H. MCTAVISH, C.P.A. AUDITOR GENERAL The auditor general shall conduct post audits of financial transactions and accounts of the state and of all
More informationCHAPTER 23. Contract Management and Administration
Date Issued: June 12, 2009 Date Last Revised: September 28, 2015 CHAPTER 23. Contract Management and Administration Table of Contents CHAPTER 23. Contract Management and Administration... 23-1 23.1 Policy...
More informationINSTALLATION REPORT OF AUDIT
INSTALLATION REPORT OF AUDIT F2010-0034-FCI000 Impresa Contract Implementation 309th Maintenance Wing Hill AFB UT Hill Area Audit Office 8 March 2010 Executive Summary INTRODUCTION OBJECTIVES In January
More informationDepartment of Defense MANUAL
Department of Defense MANUAL NUMBER 7600.07 August 3, 2015 IG DoD SUBJECT: DoD Audit Manual References: See Enclosure 1 1. PURPOSE. This manual: a. Reissues DoD 7600.07-M (Reference (a)) in accordance
More informationContracting for Services
Contracting for Services A National State Auditors Association Best Practices Document Published by the National State Auditors Association Copyright 2003 by the National State Auditors Association. All
More informationCAS. Combined Air Support Cost Accounting Standards. Cost Impact Statements
CAS Combined Air Support Cost Accounting Standards Cost Impact Statements Cost Impact Statements Presenter: Anthony J. Nicolella References 48 CFR 9903 CON 252 Fundamentals of CAS FAR Parts 30, 31 and
More informationBUSINESS ASSOCIATE AGREEMENT
BUSINESS ASSOCIATE AGREEMENT THIS BUSINESS ASSOCIATE AGREEMENT (the AGREEMENT ) is entered into this (the "Effective Date"), between Delta Dental of Tennessee ( Covered Entity ) and ( Business Associate
More informationAudit of Construction Contracts
National Research Council Canada Audit of Construction Contracts Internal Audit, NRC January 2009 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Executive Summary... 1 2.0 Introduction... 6 2.1 Background and context... 6 2.2
More informationStandard conditions of purchase
Standard conditions of purchase 1 OFFER AND ACCEPTANCE 2 PROPERTY, RISK & DELIVERY 3 PRICES & RATES The Supplier shall provide all Goods and Services in accordance with the terms and conditions set out
More informationDivision of Insurance Internal Control Questionnaire For the period July 1, 2013 through June 30, 2014
Official Audit Report Issued March 6, 2015 Internal Control Questionnaire For the period July 1, 2013 through June 30, 2014 State House Room 230 Boston, MA 02133 auditor@sao.state.ma.us www.mass.gov/auditor
More informationDoD Cloud Computing Strategy Needs Implementation Plan and Detailed Waiver Process
Inspector General U.S. Department of Defense Report No. DODIG-2015-045 DECEMBER 4, 2014 DoD Cloud Computing Strategy Needs Implementation Plan and Detailed Waiver Process INTEGRITY EFFICIENCY ACCOUNTABILITY
More informationDCAA and the Small Business Innovative Research (SBIR) Program
Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) DCAA and the Small Business Innovative Research (SBIR) Program Judice Smith and Chang Ford DCAA/Financial Liaison Advisors NAVAIR 2010 Small Business Aviation Technology
More informationMaterial Transfers and Material Management and Accounting System (MMAS)
Material Transfers and Material Management and Accounting System (MMAS) The Scenario Risk Assessment-Research and Planning: The auditor was assigned an audit of major contractor MIL s Material Management
More information