Redstone Government Consulting Blog | DCAA Audit Support (9)

ASC 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers, had an impact on the way many contractors recognized revenue related to contracts with the Federal Government. Redstone has covered this topic a couple of times (January 26, 2021 Government Contractor Challenges in 2021 Webinar and May 6, 2021 MossAdam/Redstone Webinar Compliance Changes for Government Contractors). ASC 606 also impacts the recognition of sales commissions. The overarching GAAP matching principle requires that the expense of sales be matched to the recognition of the related revenue.

In my years as a CPA and consultant I’ve worked with many small businesses that have asked for input on what they need to be doing to get more reliable financial data. Usually, it’s business owners looking for ways to be able to make important decisions faster, but lately it’s often companies new to government contracting that are trying to figure out what they need to be doing to keep clear of problems with DCAA. In either scenario, one of my first suggestions is a formal monthly close process. When I say “formal”, that doesn’t mean that it has to be cumbersome and complicated. If the business financials are relatively simple, then that close process can also be fairly simple and still be effective. But it needs to be structured, with a specific checklist in place as to the procedures that are to be performed, the order in which they are to be done, who is responsible for each task, and target deadlines for each. That recommendation then raises the next question – what do you mean by “close”?

Recent Northrop Appeal

Northrop attempted to open up a dialog with Government as to the allowability of litigation settlement costs it planned to include in its 2019-2023 Sector Home Office Allocation Submission. Of course, Northrop believed the cost was allowable, and the Corporate Administrative Contracting Officer (CACO) believed the costs to be unallowable.

For many contractors (truly, for any business), any event with the word “Audit” in the name has a scary connotation. And when you add DCAA to that, a contractor’s blood pressure may automatically rise. However, the best way to rock an audit is to understand what it is for and be prepared for it.

DoD-IG Goes After DCMA for not Supporting DCAA Findings

On February 26, 2021, the DoD-IG issued an audit report raising significant concern about the actions taken by DCMA Administrative Contracting Officers (ACOs) in relation to DCAA audit findings. The Finding section of the DoD-IG report found that out of 30 DCAA audit reports at two of the largest DoD contractors, 14 were not properly addressed per Federal Acquisition Regulation requirements by the cognizant ACO. Our guess and POGO believes the large DoD contractors are Lockheed Martin and Boeing – but this is only our guess. The DoD-IG report goes on to state that: “As a result, DCMA contracting officer actions on the eight audit reports may have resulted in improperly reimbursing DoD contractors up to $97 million in unallowable costs on Government contracts. In addition, because DCMA contracting officers did not take timely action on six audit reports, they delayed the correction of CAS noncompliances and the recovery of any increased costs due to the Government.” The report goes on to state that: “The Defense Contract Management Agency Director agreed with all five recommendations,” including reviewing ACO decisions to “Disallow and recoup any unallowable costs not previously disallowed.” (Evaluation of Defense Contract Management Agency Actions Taken on Defense Contract Audit Agency Report Findings Involving Two of the Largest Department of Defense Contractors – DoD-IG-2021-056, Dated February 26, 2021)

Where does DCAA’s View of the Contractor and their Role in Acquisition Come From?

DCAA Auditor Training

DCAA website provides that new auditors receive in-depth professional training from DCAA’s Defense Contract Audit Institute (DCAI), along with on-the-job training at their assigned field audit office. DCAI is located in Atlanta, GA and provides auditors with an excellent basis on which to start their careers in contract audit. Many at Redstone GCI can speak from personal experience that, once you get past the exciting MARTA ride from the airport, the instructors at DCAI provide a good hands-on learning environment. However, we are not sure if it is a subliminal message piped into the classroom or local indoctrination at assigned field offices, but the auditors are coming away with the impression that no contractors can be trusted, and a good audit opinion has to include questioned cost.

What’s New in this Long-Standing Area?

The FAR Council at long last issues final rule to implement the Trump Executive Order 13881, Maximizing Use of American-Made Goods, Products, and Materials. Only a few days later a Biden Executive Order 14005, Ensuring Future of America is Made in America by all of America’s Workers, hit the streets.

Contractors with cost reimbursable contracts that include the Allowable cost and payment clause, FAR 52.216-7 or Payments under Time-and-Materials and Labor-Hour contracts clause, FAR 52.232-7, are required to submit an Incurred Cost Proposal for each fiscal year costs were incurred on any cost reimbursable contract. This incurred cost proposal is provided to your Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO) and Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) with a deadline of six months after the Contractor’s fiscal year end. Once the Incurred Cost Proposal is received by DCAA, they review it for adequacy. DCAA provides a notification to the Contractor, typically via email, that the proposal is deemed adequate for audit or outlines changes DCAA believes are necessary. That is great to know it is adequate for audit but what does that mean? This means that DCAA has reviewed the incurred cost proposal and determined that the schedules are properly completed for them to begin the audit potentially.

A Little Background

FAR Part 31, Cost Principles, is the regulation that government contractors must follow in order to account for cost on most government contracts. Within FAR Part 31 is FAR 31.205, Selected Costs. This part of the cost principles regulation specifically spells out unallowable cost that the government will not pay for under a government contract. This section starts at FAR 31.205-1 and goes all the way up to FAR 31.205-52. However, it should be noted that FAR 31.205-2, 5, 9, 24, 45, and 50 are “Reserved” – These reserved cost areas went the way of the dinosaur over time, hopefully not to return. For example, FAR 31.204-2, Automatic Data Processing Equipment Leasing Costs, required an annual demonstration that leasing computer equipment was cost-effective, i.e., lowest cost to the Federal Government.

Here are the Details

DoD issued DFARs Final Rule D2019-D029 – Treatment of Commingled Items Under $10K, effective October 1, 2020, to implement several sections of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 that addresses treatment of commingled items purchased by contractors and services provided by nontraditional defense contractors as commercial items. This blog only addresses the DFARS change relative to the treatment of commingled items purchased by a contractor. The final rule is applicable to all solicitations and contracts, including solicitations and contracts using FAR Part 12 procedures for the acquisition of commercial items and solicitations and contracts valued at or below the simplified acquisition threshold.