Redstone Government Consulting Blog (21)

This article is under review as a result of EO 14173, Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity, signed by President Trump on January 21, 2025. As we await further information from OFCCP and the courts, please reference this article for current status and action items.

Over the last few years, with the uber-competitive labor market and evolving landscape of remote and hybrid work arrangements, I've had many conversations (some feeling more like counseling sessions!) with clients who had become very tired and frustrated with the rising compensation and work-related demands of candidates. These conversations included questions like: When will we see the labor market settle? How can we be profitable when paying rates such as this? What makes sense? Is there any way this would be considered reasonable? Will that be fair to my long-term employees? What we found is those with established and well-structured compensation plans were able to respond to these questions and the challenging scenarios they faced much more efficiently and effectively than those who did not.

Being a government contractor, whether you’re a novice or a veteran, comes with its own unique set of challenges. One of the most significant is the constant need to optimize indirect rates. These rates can be the deciding factor between securing new contracts and expanding your business or remaining static and missing out on opportunities. As your business grows and evolves, your indirect rates should follow suit. Regularly evaluating your rates to ensure they align with your company’s strategic plan and maximize the recovery of your allowable costs is crucial to building a thriving company.

The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2022 and 2023 permanently authorized the Department of Defense (DoD) “to acquire innovative commercial products and commercial services through a competitive selection of proposals resulting from a general solicitation, known as a commercial solutions opening (CSO).” On August 17, 2023, the final rule was published in the Federal Register under DFARS Case 2022-D005 changing several parts of the DFARS – with most of the changes within DFARS part 212.

On June 27, 2023, The Small Business Administration (SBA) Inspector General issued a White Paper titled “COVID-19 Pandemic EIDL and PPP Loan Fraud Landscape.” The paper states the IG “estimate[s] that SBA disbursed over $200 billion in potentially fraudulent COVID-19 EIDLs, EIDL Targeted Advances, Supplemental Targeted Advances, and PPP loans.” The paper going on to state: “OIG is working on tens of thousands of investigative leads on alleged fraud, waste, and abuse of taxpayer resources. Thousands of investigations will ensue for years to come because of swift congressional action to increase the statute of limitations to 10 years for COVID-19 EIDL and PPP fraud.”

In government contracting, three critical sets of guidelines govern the recognition of expenses for financial reporting and cost accounting practices: Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) govern financial reporting, and Federal contracts require Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) part 31 and Cost Accounting Standards (CAS). While both frameworks are focused on assigning expenses to the appropriate accounting period, they have distinct roles and implications for government contractors. This article explores the key differences between CAS and GAAP, focusing on their significance and application in government contracting.

In the world of federal contracting, every detail matters. A recent ruling by the Court of Federal Claims (CFC) has highlighted the critical importance of maintaining an active registration in the SAM.GOV System. Based on the interpretation of FAR Clause 52.204-7, this ruling underscores the fact that even a minor lapse in a contractor's SAM registration status can lead to disqualification from a potential award.

So, why is it that the Federal Government has a list of cost it will not pay for on Government contracts? These rules related to what costs the Government will pay for and what costs it will not pay for (i.e., unallowable costs) were developed around the Government’s belief that most companies doing business with the Government are not operating in a competitive market. As a result of the Government developing these unallowable costs, companies doing business with the Government have to take the unallowable cost they do incur out of the fixed amount of profit or fee the Government has agreed to pay these companies.

In all types of industries, organizations of any size, located in any part of the world, contracts are the lifeblood that binds their operations. These legal documents delineate the relationship between the parties, becoming the backbone of any commercial transaction, thereby maintaining the health of the organization. But merely having contracts is not enough. How these contracts are managed, specifically how they are filed and stored, plays a crucial role in a company’s overall efficiency and effectiveness. In this blog, we delve into the significance of a contract filing system and its benefits.

2 CFR 200.331, Subrecipient and contractor determinations, requires that an organization performing a grant or cooperative agreement document a case-by-case determination as to whether each sub-agreement it makes classifies the lower-tier organization in the role of a subrecipient or a contractor. The guidance provided to assist with this required determination is extremely subjective.

The Department of Defense is proposing a change to the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) that would consolidate four existing Government property clauses into a single clause. The requirements of the four clauses are not going away but are being simplified to help both contractors and Government personnel in dealing with the requirements of Government property, in particular Government-Furnished property (GFP).