Contractor Business Systems (CBS) Rule Eric Fassett.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Risk Management and the Contractor’s Property Management System
Advertisements

IND 205 Audit Analysis of an Outcome
IND 205 Auditing a Contractors Property Management System TLO #9 Auditing a Contractors Property Management System.
Office of University Partnerships Office of Policy Development and Research U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of University Partnerships.
Contract and Grant Provisions and Administration Section 105 (Page 30) Title I The Act.
A Myth-Busting Panel Discussion
OMB Circular A133 Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non-Profit Organizations 1 Departmental Research Administrators Training Track.
All you always wanted to know about Assurances Office of Research Protections (ORP) U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command (USAMRMC) Fort Detrick,
I n t e g r i t y - S e r v i c e - E x c e l l e n c e 17 th Contracting Squadron 1 Termination of Commercial Contracts.
Reporting Requirements and Procedures. Trafficking in Persons Reporting Requirements FAR Combating Trafficking in Persons* –Contractors shall.
Combating Trafficking in Persons
FAR Part 44: Subcontracting Policies & Procedures February 5, 2012.
NCMA Philadelphia Lunch & Learn What Does the Contract Say? E. Jean Labadini, Senior Advisor November 25, 2014.
772 ESS Lesson Learned Briefing
Office of University Partnerships Madlyn Wohlman-Rodriguez Hispanic-Serving Institutions Assisting Communities (HSIAC) 2006 Grant Terms and Conditions.
Accounting System Requirements The views expressed in this presentation are DCAA's views and not necessarily the views of other DoD organizations 1 Further.
DCAA – WHO WE ARE and WHAT TO EXPECT
CENTRAL CONTRACTOR REGISTRATION (CAGE CODES) DFARS Case 2003-D040 DFARS Parts 204, 212, 213 and 252 are amended to remove policy on Central Contractor.
ANSI/EIA A EIA STANDARD Earned Value Management Systems Overview May 2, 2006 NDIA Program Management Systems Committee Walt Berkey, Lockheed.
0 Origin COWC Recommendation: Federal Acquisition Regulations should provide clear policy regarding the use of payment withholds on business system deficiencies.
Contractor Business System Rule Revision #, Date (of revision) Presented By: Kendrick Dickerson, PA, DCMA Property Group May 3, 2013.
Overviews of: The Business Systems Rule The UK Bribery Act Charles D. Chadwick DII Best Practices Forum June 23, 2011.
1 EVM Policy July 2013 NAVY CEVM 2 Outline DoDI DFARS DFARS DFARS June 2012 AT&L Policy Letter.
DCAA – Fort Walton Beach Branch Office
OVERSIGHT & COMPLIANCE BRANCH (OCB) INVOICE PAYMENTS February 16,
Learn. Perform. Succeed. Protest, Claims, Disputes and Appeals Chapter 7.
CUMC IRB Investigator Meeting Human Subjects Research Non-Compliance September 15, 2005.
Office of Business Development Training
Partnership Agreements Delegation of SBA’s Contract Execution Authority to other Federal Government Agencies.
The New FAR Property Plan Collaboration is Key 2007 Eastern Region Seminar Pat Jacklets, CPPM, CF.
I n t e g r i t y - S e r v i c e - E x c e l l e n c e PPNM’s/PNM’s Date: 29 Dec 2006.
A SOUND INVESTMENT IN SUCCESSFUL VR OUTCOMES FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT.
Federalwide Assurance Presentation for IRB Members.
FAR PART 45 – Government Property
FAR Part 1 The Federal Acquisition Regulation System.
Don Mansfield Professor of Contract Management Defense Acquisition University.
Rabbanai T. Morgan Chief, Contingency Contracting 26 May 2005 Commercial Contract Financing.
Law and Administrative Rule Updates. To cover: Statutes Rules –Certified Negotiator –Confidential Information –Other Changes to 60A-1.
Preston Alderman MSDE, Director of Audit.  As recipients of federal and state funds we are charged with ensuring that the funds are adequately accounted.
Rabbanai T. Morgan Current as of 26 January 2006 Protests.
PwC Service Contracting DCAA Interests & Initiatives March 31, 2008.
Monitoring and 638 Contract Close-out. Contract Monitoring and Close-out After Award ▫ Meet with Tribe to discuss the Agreement  Include Monitoring Plan.
FAR Part 8.4 – Federal Supply Schedule Process Map1 of 2 Obtain required solicitation reviews and approvals in accordance with agency procedure: NOAA AGO.
OUSD(AT&L)DPAP EVM Status and Issues Michael Pelkey OUSD(AT&L) Defense Procurement & Acquisition Policy 4 February
National Property Management Association Lost Reports Barbara A. Finnegan, CPPM CF 1.
1 Felisha Hitt, Senior Procurement Analyst March 18, 2008 Defense Acquisition Regulations System
Effectively Integrating Information Technology (IT) Security into the Acquisition Process A course for the Department of Commerce contracting and contracting.
Privacy Act United States Army (Managerial Training)
Metrics for Property Management Eric Fassett. Metrics - standards of measurement by which efficiency, performance, progress, or quality of a plan, process,
1 Overview of the NF 1680 Evaluation of Performance Process Overview/Training Charts April 7, 2008.
Delivery System Reform Incentive Payment Program (“DSRIP”) New York Presbyterian Performing Provider System.
A risk assessment is the process of identifying potential hazards an organization may face and analyzing methods of response if exposure occurs.
Regulation Highlights Kimberly Heifetz May 15, 2012.
Small Business Insight Into the Business System Review and Audit Process Business Systems Overview.
1 Consent to Subcontract Breakout Session # D12 Name: Rita Wells Daniel Johnson Anthony Simmons Date:July 12, 2011 Time:11:15 – 12:30.
Small Business and Subcontracting. Subcontracting for Small Business 6 steps to successful subcontracting 6. Report Contractor performance 1. Consider.
Presented to: By: Date: Federal Aviation Administration Ready for Cost Type Contracts - Accounting Systems and Administration Small Business Vendor Day.
Evaluating Small Business Participation
Subaward - 2 CFR A formal legal agreement between your institution and another legal entity An award provided by a pass-through entity (PTE) to.
Consent to Subcontract
Module 6 Corrective Action Request (CAR) Overview
Small Business and Subcontracting.
EVM 202—Lesson 5 EVMS Surveillance
Contracting by Negotiation Process Map – Part 15 (1 of 3)
PRODUCT EVALUATION & TESTING BRANCH SUPPLIER SUPPORT DIVISION II
Commercial Contract Financing
Letter Contracts Rabbanai T. Morgan
EVM Policy NAVY CEVM July 2013
Contractor Business System Rule
OSU Controlled Substances Training Module for Researchers
Presentation transcript:

Contractor Business Systems (CBS) Rule Eric Fassett

Timothy Callahan Executive director for contracts at the Defense Contract Management Agency said the new regulation aims to ensure that business systems act as “the first line of defense against fraud, waste and abuse in Department of Defense contracts.” Still, he said the government has put in place a review board to provide another layer of consideration before a business system is determined deficient. “The end game is not to disapprove business systems and withhold payments,” Callahan said. “Our desired outcome is for the contractors to have systems that are approved so we can rely upon the information that’s produced to help us manage our programs more effectively.” Guidance on the CBS Rule may be found at

The CBS Rule applies to contracts that are subject to Cost Accounting Standards (CAS) covered awards DFARS defines Contractor business systems as (1) Accounting system, if this contract includes the clause at , Accounting System Administration; (2) Earned value management system, if this contract includes the clause at , Earned Value Management System; (3) Estimating system, if this contract includes the clause at , Cost Estimating System Requirements;

(4) Material management and accounting system, if this contract includes the clause at , Material Management and Accounting System; (5) Property management system, if this contract includes the clause at , Contractor Property Management System Administration; and (6) Purchasing system, if this contract includes the clause at , Contractor Purchasing System Administration.

“Property management system” means the Contractor’s system or systems for managing and controlling Government property. “Significant deficiency” means a shortcoming in the system that materially affects the ability of officials of the Department of Defense to rely upon information produced by the system that is needed for management purposes. “Acceptable property management system” means a property system that complies with the system criteria in paragraph (c) of this clause.

(c) System criteria. The Contractor’s property management system shall be in accordance with paragraph (f) of the contract clause at Federal Acquisition Regulation Contractor Plans and Systems (FAR (f)) –Acquisition of Property –Receipt of Government Property –Records of Government property –Physical Inventory –Subcontractor control –Reports –Relief of stewardship responsibility –Utilizing Government property –Maintenance –Property Closeout

The Government Property Administrator/Functional Specialist (GPA) performs Property Management System Analysis (PMSA) The GPA prepares business systems reports and summarizes findings using the Business System Analysis Summary (BSAS) document and forwards both to the Contracting Officer (CO) for review CO to discuss findings with GPA to determine if deficiencies are significant

If there are no significant deficiencies, the CO shall issue a final determination, notifying the Contractor in writing that the system is acceptable and approved For non-significant findings (Level I or II CAR), the GPA shall pursue corrective action, as appropriate If significant deficiencies are identified, the CO issues an initial written determination letter Contractor has 30 days to respond either taking exception or agreeing with findings (they may submit a corrective action plan at this time)

CO will evaluate Contractor response and consult with GPA Prior to submitting a final determination letter disapproving a system, the CO shall obtain a higher- level review from the Contractor Business Systems Review Panel. CO Issues Final Determination approving system or disapproving system, requiring correction, and initiating withholding against contract payments (5% per system, not to exceed 10% total on any contract)

(e) If the Contractor receives the Contracting Officer’s final determination of significant deficiencies, the Contractor shall, within 45 days of receipt of the final determination, either correct the significant deficiencies or submit an acceptable corrective action plan showing milestones and actions to eliminate the significant deficiencies. (f) Withholding payments. If the Contracting Officer makes a final determination to disapprove the Contractor’s property management system, and the contract includes the clause at , Contractor Business Systems, the Contracting Officer will withhold payments in accordance with that clause.

Corrective Action Requests (DCMA-INST-1201) There are four CAR levels (I, II, III, and IV). Level I and II CARs may be issued by functional specialists... For Level III and IV CARs, the cognizant Contracting Officer (CO) is responsible for issuance of the CAR, acceptance of contractor corrective action plans, and CAR closure. [NOTE: When the acronym “CO” is used, it refers to the appropriate Corporate Administrative Contracting Officer (CACO), Divisional Administrative Contracting Officer (DACO) or Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO).] The ACO shall work closely with the functional specialists throughout the corrective action process.

Level I. Level I is issued for noncompliances that are minor in nature, are promptly corrected by the contractor, and present no need for root cause determination or further preventive action. Level I CARs shall be issued to the contractor management level responsible for correcting the cited noncompliance. While the contractor must correct the noncompliance, further actions are not required regarding the specific noncompliance.

Level II. Level II is issued for noncompliances that are not promptly correctable and warrant root cause analysis and preventive action, or need action by the contractor to determine if other product/services are affected. Level II CARs shall be directed to the contractor management level responsible for initiating corrective actions. A written response from the contractor is required.

Level III. Level III is issued to the contractor’s management responsible for the company or business segment to call attention to a serious noncompliance, a significant deficiency pursuant to Reference (e), a failure to respond to a lower level CAR, or to remedy recurring noncompliance. A written response from the contractor is required. A Level III CAR, may result in initiation of available contractual remedies, such as reductions of payments, cost disallowances, revocation of government assumption of risk of loss, or business management systems disapprovals, etc.

Level IV. Level IV is issued to the contractor’s segment or corporate management and when the contractual noncompliance(s) is of a serious nature or when a Level III CAR has been ineffective. A written response from the contractor is required. A Level IV CAR will result in a mandatory review of available contractual remedies, such as cost disallowance, reduction or suspension of payments, revocation of government assumption of risk of loss, business system disapproval, or suspension of product acceptance activities (see paragraph below). Any contractual remedies will be implemented IAW applicable FAR/DFARS policies and procedures