THE PROGRAM OFFICE ASSEMBLED THE NECESSARY EXPERTISE TO ANALYZE TIME AND WORK REMAINING ON THE CONTRACT AND DETERMINE WHETHER DOD
COULD RECOVER ITEMS OF VALUE FOR POSSIBLE USE IN OTHER DOD EFFORTS.
the Defense Reutilization and Market- ing Service), for items that the property sub-IPT did not claim and for unused production materials. DLA Disposi- tion Services allowed the contractor to turn in similar items without generat- ing detailed lists; once the property was at the DLA site, the contractor was absolved of responsibility.
Second, the effort to identify, prepare, assemble, pack and ship property took longer than anticipated. Experience was key, and to gain experience, the contrac- tor conducted “pathfinder” activities on smaller shipments to prove out its pro- cesses for sorting, assembling, packing and shipping. Tis upfront work was essential, because as the effort to pack and ship property increased, the contract workforce decreased with the end of the performance period approaching.
Te resolution of “in limbo” contract actions, such as deferred ordering, requests for equitable adjustments, and fee schedules, also required early focus. By negotiating a change of the award fee to a fixed fee, thus negating the need for an award fee board, the government was able to reduce the schedule.
Finalizing contract actions also took longer than expected, especially when legal staffs were engaged. For example,
DCMA’s patent closure process required that not only the program office but also the program office’s legal staff declare its opinion of the patent report, even though the contractor did not intend to file any patents. Other early activi- ties included disposition instructions for classified documents and cryptographic items, and creating instructions for demilitarizing items.
CONCLUSION If a program office must conduct contract closeout, it is critical to look continuously for efficiencies and strive for open com- munication. After the government gave disposition instructions to the prime contractor, the prime included sub- contractors in the closeout IPT meetings.
Tis allowed the government to provide clarification directly to all parties and reduce response times. DLA and DCMA were excellent resources, but continuous coordination was needed to ensure that they stayed abreast of day-to-day devel- opments and addressed contractor issues.
GMR successfully completed direct cost closeout activities without extending the period of performance. While it did not complete the shipping of property by the end of the contract period, the contrac- tor did ship 95 percent of the property to intended consignees by early April
and completed shipments in May 2011. Te program office avoided termination expenses, received critical deliverables, stayed within cost estimates, and main- tained an amicable relationship with industry partners.
Facing a program cancellation, program managers should conduct a thorough analysis to determine whether it would be in the government’s best interest to continue work on the contract or ter- minate for convenience. If a decision is made to close out a contract, forming a government/contractor IPT as early as possible will help set the stage for a coop- erative working environment that results in efficient contract closeout while mini- mizing direct costs.
For more information, contact the PEO Command, Control, and Communications
– Tactical, Mid-Tier Networking Vehicular Radio Program Office in San Diego, CA, at 619-524-5784.
MAJ JENNY TAM was an Assistant Prod- uct Manager for the Joint Tactical Radio System, Ground Mobile Radios Program Office. She holds a B.S. in computer science from the United States Military Academy and an M.S. in computer science from the Naval Postgraduate School. TAM is Level II certified in program management.
ASC.ARMY.MIL 129
CONTRACTING
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164 |
Page 165 |
Page 166 |
Page 167 |
Page 168 |
Page 169 |
Page 170 |
Page 171 |
Page 172 |
Page 173 |
Page 174 |
Page 175 |
Page 176 |
Page 177 |
Page 178 |
Page 179 |
Page 180 |
Page 181 |
Page 182 |
Page 183 |
Page 184 |
Page 185 |
Page 186 |
Page 187 |
Page 188 |
Page 189 |
Page 190 |
Page 191 |
Page 192 |
Page 193 |
Page 194 |
Page 195 |
Page 196 |
Page 197 |
Page 198 |
Page 199 |
Page 200 |
Page 201 |
Page 202 |
Page 203 |
Page 204 |
Page 205 |
Page 206 |
Page 207 |
Page 208 |
Page 209 |
Page 210 |
Page 211 |
Page 212
