Government Computer News (GCN) recently carried a story on the difficulties experienced with, "Performance-Based Contracting", which has been made part of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) in an attempt to pre-establish at contract award those discrete outcomes that determine if and when a contractor will be paid.
Interestingly enough, the article splits the blame for the difficulties right down the middle, stating the government typically has problems defining what it wants as an end product or outcome and looks to contractors to define it for them. More than willing to do so, the contactors detail specific end products or outcomes, set schedule milestones and submit competitive proposals.
The winner is selected based on what the government thinks it needs at the time to fulfill its requirement and a contract is negotiated. Once underway, the government decides it wants something else (usually a management-by-government committee phenomena with a contractor growing his product or service by offering lots of options). The resulting change of contract scope invalidates the original price and schedule, so a whole new round of proposals and negotiations must occur with the winner while the losers watch something totally different evolve than that for which they competed. The clock keeps ticking and the winner keeps getting his monthly bill paid based on incurred cost or progress payments. The link to the GCN article is below:
The present state of the economy will not allow the aforementioned to continue. Government agencies are now hard pressed to insure the most "Bang for the Buck". It is in the long term interests of astute contractors to assist in that endeavor. The only way to achieve such an objective is through sound technical, cost and schedule contract definition via an iterative process of baseline management and control. This article will address that process.
SOLICITATION AND STATEMENT OF WORK BASELINE
If you are selling a straight commercial product off the shelf, the problem of baseline management is minimal, assuming your product meets the specifications required and you deliver on time. Is it during development programs for new products or service contracts involving labor supplied to the government that lack of definition and poor communication are high risks. The initial benchmark for managing this risk is in the government solicitation and statement of work.
A wise customer farms the preliminary draft solicitation and statement of work out to prospective bidders and requests comment. A wise supplier is constructive, yet critical in pointing out weaknesses in the document.
Part 1, Section C, is where the technical specifications and statement of work are located in the solicitation and will reside in your negotiated contract.Without a well written Statement of Work (SOW) and associated supplies and services specifications there is unacceptable risk in the future contract and is it exceptionally high risk to bid or contract the job. Both the contractor and the government must come to an understanding regarding the scope of effort to be performed. That understanding is conveyed in the SOW and confirmed in the specifications referenced therein. A good SOW should have the following principal attributes:
* Clear identification of the products, services, skills, materials and performance factors required to complete the contract
* A description of the conditions under which the contractor will be required to perform and any related environmental or location factors
* Specific references to product specifications that govern an acceptable product or services performance outcome and delivery acceptance
* A schedule for the contract that identifies discrete delivery dates for products and specific start and end dates for supporting labor.
* A precise description of government furnished material or facilities required and when it will be made available to the contractor.
If your customer does not provide the above, offer a revision to the document during the comments period, during your proposal or during negotiations that represents a version to which your company will commit. Do not let the fact the program is competitive sway you from the facts. Signing off on a poorly written SOW results in a difficult contract to manage, a high probability for disputes during the contracting period and a poor past performance record you will have to deal with in the future on other jobs.
You should also do a complete review of the Contract Line Item (CLIN) Structure in the solicitation and cross foot SOW requirements to insure the scope is covered by the CLIN'S.
Please see the following article on how to perform this analysis:
The following article discusses the standard template for negotiations through which government contracts generally pass:
During the audit, fact-finding and subsequent negotiation steps, a growing definition of the contract occurs and a clear understanding between you and your customer evolves. If you find the process slow and unknowns frequently surfacing, that is a barometer of future difficulty unless the issues are resolved. Technical work scope, schedule, cost and terms and conditions regarding inspection and acceptance as well as payment provisions are especially sensitive.
CONTRACT AWARD BASELINE
Signing the contract represents full agreement on the proposal and conclusion of negotiations. Award is the benchmark baseline for contract performance.
BASELINE MAINTENANCE - THE CHANGES CLAUSE
During the period of performance on a development or services contract, effort does not always go as planned. The article on Earned Value Performance Measurement (EVMS) at this site is one technique to control this situation:
Not all programs warrant EVMS or have the funding to perform that type of control. The simple rule of thumb is that the changes clause in your contract allows you to request additional funding and schedule relief, as well as a modification to the SOW if you are being driven by customer directed work scope change events to depart from the baseline to which you committed at contract award.
To the extent you do not remain sensitive to this provision, on a firm fixed price contract you will lose money. On a cost plus and time and materials type contract you will consume funding at a higher rate and faster than the contact baseline anticipated and your customer may or may not be able to provide additional monies when the ceiling amount on the contract is reached. At that point in time it is too late and everyone is disappointed.
The above occurrences are collectively known as "Scope Creep" in project management circles.
THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN BUDGET AND FUNDING - (Limitation of Funds and Funding Exposure)
Many federal contracts are funded incrementally, usually based on the government fiscal year that runs from 1 October to 30 September. Although the government may negotiate dollar price ceilings for cost plus and time and materials contracts or firm, fixed total price arrangements, the contracts themselves may be incrementally funded, particularly if they extend over two government fiscal years.
A contract may contain negotiated prices or a cost ceiling but also specify an incremental funding value. The contractor is required to inform the government when actual costs incurred plus obligations to suppliers or payroll on a specific contract reach certain thresholds of the current incremental funding specified in the contract (usually 80%). The government is then obligated to further fund the contract. In the event the contract is not funded further, the contractor has the right to stop work before he exceeds the incremental funding.
Some contractors choose to operate on "risk," continuing to perform on a contract while exceeding the incremental funding in booked cost and obligations. The government is under no obligation to reimburse the contractor for amounts exceeding incremental funding.
Nearing the end of a government fiscal year, a contractor may find delays in funding reaching all the way to congress. This situation must be managed with the government contracting officer.
If a contract is not funded to continue and the contractor has performed to date in accordance with all required terms, the government retains the right to terminate the contract for the convenience of the government. This requires a special notification to the contractor from the government and usually occurs due to changes in government priorities. The contractor may then bill the government for all costs and obligations to date, plus any direct and indirect extraordinary costs associated with business disruption, termination administration, employee layoff cost and the like. Terminations for convenience are very expensive for the government. Nevertheless, limitation of funds and funding exposure must be carefully monitored by an astute small business.
To properly manage incremental funding, the business system must be capable of accounting monthly for all direct and indirect costs on each contract, plus commitments to suppliers and employees in the form of open purchase orders and unpaid or un-posted payroll.
Your internal release document should specify the current incremental funding if your contract is not fully funded at award. Further revisions to your release documentation should convey receipt of contact amendments from the government that supply additional required funding to the contract as performance proceeds. Requests for increases in incremental funding are required when the actual booked cost plus commitments to suppliers reaches 80% of the current funding on the contact.
In the event the contact is not adequately funded incrementally by the government, a revision to your internal release documentation should specify a stop work order after you have notified your customer that you plan to cease performance on the contract due to lack of sufficient funding. Notification should be provided to suppliers under your contract with a stop work to avoid their incurring additional costs for which you are not receiving funding from the government. Be specific with a stop work date to these suppliers.
IN SUMMARY - KNOW WHERE YOUR ARE AND WHEN TO SAY "NO"
"Scope Creep" can kill a contract, a customer relationship and a past performance record, all of which are important to your business. Stay in front of "The Scope Creep" by communicating positively with your customer to control your baseline, keeping cost, schedule and technical performance integrated and synchronous.
Six rules of Thumb to control "Scope Creep":
1. KNOW - The contract value and its ceiling amount
2. KNOW - The incurred cost to date and commitments
3. KNOW - The scope of work and whether or not your current efforts are supporting it or some other objectives
4. KNOW - The estimated cost at completion based on where you are at today
5. KNOW - Your customer and who among the customer population is prone to direct out of scope effort.
6. KNOW - WHEN TO SAY "NO" to "Scope Creep" and say it officially in writing to the contracting officer specified in your contract.