DCAA COMPLIANCE BLOG
Your Source for DCAA News and Government Contracting Information
Posted by Mike Anderson on Mon, Apr 28, 2014 @ 09:39 AM
There was a lot written about sequestration earlier this year, including a lot of panic that sequestration would all but shut down the government and our economy would crash. Well it seems that the economy did not crash and the government did not shut down. The news lately has died down relative to sequestration being a doomsday scenario. I think most of what we see today is "blaming" the loss of a program or government activity on the sequestration actions here and there but not the mass hysteria of earlier in the year. So what really happened with sequestration and what will the effects really be? I have recently read a couple of good articles that seem to have a handle on what is actually transpiring with respect to sequestration. In short, the impact is slow to see the actual results of the actions. We have seen some impact but the impact may grow over time, especially if sequestration continues into FY2014 and further.
Posted by Mike Anderson on Fri, Jun 14, 2013 @ 11:00 AM
The other day I talked about how there could be a lot of funding released in the next 3 months. I think there is some evidence already of this activity beginning. For instance, in the last week the US Army announced they have issued a 5 year multiple award contract totaling up to $7B. There were 8 companies chosen and now each of these companies can compete for task orders under the multiple award agreement. Granted, this is not yet a release of funds (until one of the 8 wins the first task order) but it shows that things are starting to happen. Here is a sample of other announced major awards from the last several weeks:
Posted by Mike Anderson on Fri, Jun 07, 2013 @ 11:26 AM
Posted by Mike Anderson on Fri, May 24, 2013 @ 01:08 PM
I have had several discussions recently with small businesses that are concerned with finding ways to fund their small business. Anyone that has started a business knows that certainly is one of the major concerns with starting a new business. But to someone new to this field, it can be a very frustrating exercise. Many people assume that the funding has to come from an independently wealthy founder. While this is certainly a way that some companies are founded but by no means is this the only way. This is part of what is affectionately known as one of the 4 F's for financing an early stage business (Founder, Friends, Family and Fools). Countless businesses are started with one or more of the 4 F's. Most of the time, this type of funding is only sufficient to get the firm started or only take the firm to a certain size. Relying on this type of financing will almost certainly limit the ultimate size of the organization.
Posted by Mike Anderson on Fri, May 03, 2013 @ 08:00 AM
The FY2014 Federal Government Budget was released by the Executive Branch and sent to the Legislative branch on April 10, 2013. The budget proposal is 244 pages long. President Obama indicated that this budget proposal was geared to make America a magnet for new jobs and manufacturing. So what does that mean and how will that create opportunities? I want to explore a little of that here.
Most of the core requirements for contracting with the Federal Government originate in the Federal Acquisition Regulations or FAR. These series of documents describe in great detail the how and the why of government procurements. The FAR may reference other regulations and may infer other regulations. This eventually turns into what we affectionately refer to as a "rat maze" to chase down all the requirements that may be imposed on a contractor.
Posted by Mike Anderson on Mon, Jun 11, 2012 @ 09:00 AM
This question may come up many times in a small business. It may start out even more basic as "Do I need an Accountant?". As you can see from the referenced article, there are many sound reasons to enlist the help of an outside accountant to help your small business. All of these reasons are valid for the government contractor and then some. There are a myriad of rules and regulations put on the business that chooses to contract with the government. Some people even refer to accounting for government contracts as "Job Cost Accounting on Steriods". There is definately a "price" associated with government contracting. I know that many small companies decide to try to do the accounting and contract compliance themselves, in order to save money. After all, all the government requirements are "public domain" documents and readily available. This is true, however due to the huge volume of regulations, the complexity and intertwined references of the regulations, it can easily consume excessive time for the uninitiated. Heck, it can even drain a lot of time for the experienced regulation navigator. So to me, the question is not so much about saving a dollar up front but how much money will you spend overall trying to stay compliant. There are two ways to calculate this "cost of doing business". The obvious cost is that of the money spent to do the accounting. The not-so-obvious cost is the opportunity cost related to the work the individual doing the accounting. In other words, what is that person not doing that could help impact the company bottom line while they research regulations, do the accounting, re-do the accounting due to initial errors, reconcile the accounts due to differences that were initially not obvious and other seemingly mundane tasks. I have met many scientists that were frustrated doing accounting because it took more of their time than they thought they could afford (and took them away from what truely excited them). The other cost is that of delayed payments due to improper records, government audits and the possibility of cancellations due to non-conformances. I've seen all of these happen to companies that lease suspected it.