NASA FAR Sup 1816

Previous Page TOC Next Page



PART 1816

TYPES OF CONTRACTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SUBPART 1816.2 FIXED-PRICE CONTRACTS

1816.202 Firm-fixed-price contracts.

1816.202-70 NASA contract clause.

1816.203 Fixed-price contracts with economic price adjustment.

1816.203-4 Contract clauses.

SUBPART 1816.3 COST-REIMBURSEMENT CONTRACTS

1816.303-70 Cost-sharing contracts.

1816.306 Cost-plus-fixed-fee contracts.

1816.307 Contract clauses.

1816.307-70 NASA contract clauses.

SUBPART 1816.4 INCENTIVE CONTRACTS

1816.402 Application of pre-determined, formula- type incentives.

1816.402-2 Technical performance incentives.

1816.402-270 NASA technical performance incentives.

1816.405 Cost-reimbursement incentive contracts.

1816.405-2 Cost-plus-award-fee (CPAF) contracts.

1816.405-270 CPAF contracts.

1816.405-271 Base fee.

1816.405-272 Award fee evaluation periods.

1816.405-273 Award fee evaluations.

1816.405-274 Award fee evaluation factors.

1816.405-275 Award fee evaluation scoring.

1816.406 Contract clauses.

1816.406-70 NASA contract clauses.

SUBPART 1816.5 INDEFINITE-DELIVERY CONTRACTS

1816.504 Indefinite quantity contracts.

1816.505 Ordering.

1816.505-70 Task Ordering.

1816.506-70 NASA contract clause.

SUBPART 1816.6 TIME-AND-MATERIALS, LABOR-HOUR, AND ` LETTER CONTRACTS

1816.603 Letter contracts.

1816.603-370 Approvals.

PART 1816

TYPES OF CONTRACTS

Subpart 1816.2--Fixed-Price Contracts

F

1816.202 Firm-fixed-price contracts.

1816.202-70 NASA contract clause.

The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 1852.216-78, Firm-Fixed-Price, in firm-fixed-price solicitations and contracts. Insert the appropriate amount in the resulting contract.

1816.203 Fixed-price contracts with economic price adjustment.

1816.203-4 Contract clauses.

(a) In addition to the approval requirements in the prescriptions at FAR 52.216-2 through 52.216-4, the contracting officer shall coordinate with the installation's Deputy Chief Financial Officer (Finance)Management Officer before exceeding the ten-percent limit in paragraph (c)(1) of the clauses at FAR 52.216-2 through 52.216-4.

(d)(2) Contracting officers shall contact the Office of Procurement, Code HC, for specific guidance on preparing clauses using cost indexes. Such clauses require advance approval by the Associate Administrator for Procurement. Requests for approval shall be submitted to the Headquarters Office of Procurement (Code HS). The factors in paragraphs (b)(2)(i) through (x) of this section should be considered in preparing any price adjustment clause in situations meeting the criteria of FAR 16.203-4(d):

(i) The clause should not be overly complex.

(ii) The clause shall provide for a ceiling for adjustment if a floor is included in the clause.

(iii) The clause shall cover only those elements of cost that are subject to unpredictable economic fluctuation.

(iv) (A) The clause must clearlyadjustments will be based and must provide an alternative in the event publication of the designated index is discontinued. The alternative might include a substitutewould justify it and an appropriate index is reasonably available, or some other method for repricing the remaining portion of the work.

(B) There should normally be no need to make an adjustment if computation of the identified index is altered; however, provision may be made to adjust the economic fluctuation computations if the method of computing the index is so substantially altered as to negate the original intent of the parties. When an index to be used is subject to revision (e.g., the Bureau of Labor Statistics Producer Price Indexes), the price adjustment clause shall further specify that any adjustment shall be based upon the applicable revised index.

(v) An index should be structured to encompass a large sample of relevant items, yet bear a logical relationship to the type of contract costs measured. The basis of the index should not be so large and diverse that it is significantly affected by fluctuations not relevant to contract performance. However, it must be broad enough to ensure that the effect created by any single company, including the anticipated contractor, is minimal.

(vi) The clause must clearlywhich an index, established in the contract, will be applied.

(vii) The clause should provide for definite times or events for price adjustments from the point when economic uncertainty commences. It should not provide for adjustment beyond the original contract performance period. Adjustments should be frequent enough to afford the contractor appropriate economic relief without creating a burdensome administrative effort. The adjustment frequency should,normally range from six to twelve months.

(viii) The expenditure profile for both labor and material should be based on a predetermined rate of expenditure (expressed as the percentage of material or labor use as related to total contract price) in lieu of actual cost incurred. If the clause is to be used in a competitive procurement, the labor and material allocations, with regard to both mix and percentage rate of expenditure, shall be determined by the contracting officer in a manner approximating, as nearly as possible, the average-expenditure profile of all companies likely to make offers. If the clause is to be used in a noncompetitive procurement, the labor and material allocations determined by the contracting officer may be subject to negotiation and agreement.

(ix) (A) The clause should state the percentage of the contract price or the amount subject to adjustment. Adjustments shall not be applied to profit.

(B) Additionally, the labor and material portions of the contract must be examined to exclude areas not requiring adjustment. It may not be necessary, fFsubcontracting, because some subcontract efforts could be completed during the early life of the contract and/or be firm-fixed-price. Certain areas of overhead should be excluded from escalation protection; e.g., depreciation charges, prepaid insurance costs, rental costs, leases, certain taxes, and utility charges. Economic fluctuation protection should not apply to that portion of labor for the period for which a definitive union agreement exists or for which Department of Labor wage determinations are known.

(C) That portion of the contract determined to be proper for economic fluctuation protection shall then be allocated to specific time periods (e.g., semiannually) on the basis of the expenditure profile.

(x) The economic price adjustment clause should provide that once the labor and material allocations have been established, they remain fixed through the life of the contract. If smodifications which affect contract price are determined by adjustment. If the contracting officer determines that such an action should to price adjustment, a new economic price adjustment clause should be incorporated into the contract. Such a clause would require prior approvals in accordance with 18-16.203-4(b)(1).

When economic price adjustment clauses are included in contracts that do not require submission of cost or pricing data (see FAR 15.804-1 and -2), the contracting officer shall obtain adequate information to establish the contract cost base from which adjustments will be made. In addition, the contracting officer may require verification of this information to the extent necessary to validate its reliabilityupon it as reasonable.

1816.203-470 NASA Provision.

Price Adjustment, in all negotiated competitiveadjustment clause.

The contracting officer shall insert a clause substantially as stated at 1852.216-79, Level-of-Effort (Fixed-Price), in fixed-price term solicitations and contracts. Insert the minimum direct labor hours, the labor categories and associated direct labor hours, and a formula or rate(s) (dollar amount(s)) by which the fixed price may be reduced if the minimum direct labor hours have not been provided. The labor category information may be simplified (e.g., "engineering" or "drafting") for smaller, less complex procurements.

For task ordering procedures for firm-fixed-price, level-of-effort term contracts, see 18-16.307-70(d).

Subpart 1816.3--Cost-Reimbursement Contracts

1816.303-70 Cost-sharing contracts.

(a) Cost-sharing with for-profit organizations.

(1) Cost sharing by for-profit organizations (i) is mandatory in any contract for basic or applied research resulting from an unsolicited proposal, and

(2) (i) Cost sharing by non- Federal organizations (ii) may be accepted in any other contract when offered by the proposing organization. The requirement for cost-sharing may be waived when the contracting officer determines in writing that the contractor has no commercial, production, education, or service activities that would benefit from the results of the research, and the contractor has no means of recovering its shared costs on such projects.

(2) The contractor's cost-sharing may be any percentage of the project cost. In determining the amount of cost-sharing, the contracting officer shall consider the relative benefits to the contractor and the Government. Factors that should be considered include--

(i) the potential for the contractor to recover its contribution from non-Federal sources;

(ii) the extent to which the particular area of research requires special stimulus in the national interest; and

(iii) the extent to which the research effort or result is likely to enhance the contractor's capability, expertise, or competitive advantage.

(ii) Conly institution is aware of NASA's policy that the amount of cost sharing is not a factor in determining whether to support a given pr (b) Cost-sharing with not-for-profit organizations.

(1) Cost sharing is not applicable to contracts for basic or applied research resulting from an unsolicited proposal when (i) the offeror certifies in writing to the contracting officer that it has no commercial, production, educational, or service activities on which to use the results of the research, and no means of recovering any cost sharing on such projects, and (ii) the contracting officer determines that cost sharing does not apply and documents the file with a memorandum. In these situations, where there is no measurable potential gain to the performing organization, mutuality of interest does not exist and it would not be equitable for the Government to require cost sharing.

(2) (i) NASA's normal policy is to fully reimburse universities for research performed on its behalf. However, to establish on a case-by-case basis that there is no clear potential for significant future benefit or measurable gain to the university, and that cost sharing is not appropriate, the contracting officer shall document the file with a determination substantively the same as that required by 1816.303(b)(1) of this section. The determination shall identify the information on which it is based. If the determination cannot reasonably be made from the available information, the contracting officer shall request the university to certify as in 1816.303(b)(1) of this section. Blanket procedures shall not be established for routinely obtaining certifications from all universities.

(ii)

(1) Costs to perform research stemming from an unsolicited proposal by universities and other educational or not-for-profit institutions are usually fully reimbursed. When the contracting officer determines that there is a potential for significant benefit to the institution cost-sharing will be considered.

(2) The contracting officer will normally limit the institution's share to no more than 10 percent of the project's cost.

cost sharing is determined applicable, a cost-sharing offer will be requested during negotiations.

(c) Implementation.

Cost-sharing shall be stated as a minimum percentage of the total allowable costs of the project. The contractor's contributed costs may not be charged to the Government under any other contract or grant, including allocation to other contracts and grants as part of an independent research and development program.

(1) educational institutions and affiliated not-for- profit institutions, normally varies from one percent to as much as five percent of the project's cost.

(2)

(i) Cost sharing for organizations other than those in paragraph (1) of this section may be any percentage of the research cost. Mutuality of interest in the results of the work being performed is of primary significance in assessing the appropriateness of any particular level of cost sharing.

(ii) Factors that should be considered in determining mutuality of interest include --

(A) The potential of the contractor to recover its contribution from non-Federal sources;

(B) The extent to which the particular area of research requires special stimulus in the national interest; and

(C) The extent to which a research effort or result is likely to enhance the contractor's capability, expertise, or competitive position.

(1) agreed-to portion of allowable costs shall be reimbursed.

(2) one or more elements of the allowable cost of the work being performed. It normally shall be expressed as a stated minimum percentage of the total allowable costs of the project. Costs so contributed may not be charged to the Government under any other grant or contract (including allocation to other grants or contracts as part of an independent research and development program).

(3) sharing and support for the amount or percentage of cost sharing agreed upon. For educational institutions, the reasons for any cost sharing exceeding (i) five percent or (ii) the amount originally offered shall be documented.

1816.306 Cost-plus-fixed-fee contracts.

(d) Completion and term forms.

(4) Term form contracts are incompatible with performance base contracting (PBC) and should not be used with PBC requirements.

1816.307 Contract clauses.

(a) In paragraph (h)(2)(ii)(B) of the Allowable Cost and Payment clause at FAR 52.216-7, the period of years may be increased to correspond with any statutory period of limitation applicable to claims of third parties against the contractor; provided, that a corresponding increase is made in the period for retention of records required in paragraph (f) of the clause at FAR 52.215-2, Audit and Records - Negotiation.

(b) In solicitations and contracts containing the clause at FAR 52.216-8, Fixed Fee, the Schedule shall include appropriate terms, if any, for provisional billing against fee.

(d) In solicitations and contracts containing the clause at FAR 52.216-10, Incentive Fee, the Schedule shall include appropriate terms, if any, for provisional billing against fee.

(g) In paragraph (g)(2)(ii) of the Allowable Cost and Payment--Facilities clause at FAR 52.216-13, the period of years may be increased to correspond with any statutory period of limitation applicable to claims of third parties against the contractor; provided, that a corresponding increase is made in the period for retention of records required in paragraph (f) of the clause at FAR 52.215-2, Audit and Records - Negotiation.

1816.307-70 NASA contract clauses.

(a) The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 1852.216-73, Estimated Cost and Cost Sharing, in each contract in which costs are shared by the contractor pursuant to 1816.303-70.

(b)The contracting officer shall insert the clause substantially as stated at 1852.216-74, Estimated Cost and Fixed Fee, in cost-plus-fixed-fee contracts.

(c) The contracting officer may insert the clause at 1852.216-75, Payment of Fixed Fee, in cost-plus-fixed-fee contracts. Modifications to the clause are authorized. (1) The contracting officer may insert a clause substantially as stated at 1852.216-80, Task Ordering Procedure, in level-of-effort term solicitations and contracts where (i) the statement of work is general in nature and (ii) task orders are needed to further define and clarify the effort required. This clause is applicable to both fixed-price and cost-reimbursement type term contracts. Alternate I shall be used when the clause is included in completion solicitations and contracts.

(2) The contracting officer may issue task orders which tailor the list of information which the contractor is directed to provide in paragraph (b)(2) of the clause at 1852.216-80.

(d) The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 1852.216-81, Estimated Cost, in cost-no-fee contracts that are not cost sharing or facilities contracts.

(1) The contracting officer shall insert a clause substantially as stated at 1852.216-82, Level-of-Effort (Cost), in term cost- reimbursement type solicitations and contracts. Insert the required information in the blanks provided.

(2) Prior to reducing the contract fee in accordance with paragraph (d) of clause 1852.216-82, the contracting officer shall analyze the information, if any, provided by the contractor. The analysis and its bearing on the amount of the reduction shall be documented in the contract file.

(e) The contracting officer may insert a clause substantially as stated at 1852.216-87, Submission of Vouchers for Payment, in cost-reimbursement solicitations and contracts. The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 1852.216-89 in solicitations and contracts in which the clause at (FAR) 48 CFR 52.216-7 is included and to which (FAR) 48 CFR Subpart 31.2 is applicable.

(f) When either FAR clause 52.216-7, Allowable Cost and Payment, or FAR clause 52.216-13, Allowable Cost and Payment---Facilities, is included in the contract, as prescribed at FAR 16.307(a) and (g), the contracting officer should include the clause at 1852.216-89, Assignment and Release Forms.NASA Form 780, Contractor's Assignment of Refunds, Rebates, Credits, and Other Amounts, to fulfill the assignment and release requirements of thosethe clauses prescribed at FAR 16.307(a) and (g) (i.e., the clauses at FAR 52.216-7, Allowable Cost and Payment, and 52.216-13, Allowable Cost and Payment---Facilities). Computer-generated forms may be accepted provided they comply with FAR clause 52.253-1.

Subpart 1816.4--Incentive Contracts

1816.402 Application of pre-determined, formula-type incentives.

1816.402-2 Technical performance incentives.

1816.402-270 NASA technical performance incentives.

(a) A performance incentive shall be included in all contracts where the primary deliverable(s) is (are) hardware and where total estimated cost and fee is greater than $25 million unless it is determined that the nature of the acquisition (for example, commercial off-the-shelf computers) would not effectively lend itself to a performance incentive. Any exception to this requirement shall be approved in writing by the Center Director. Performance incentives may be included in hardware contracts valued under $25 million at the discretion of the procurement officer. Performance incentives, which are objective and measure hardware performance after delivery and acceptance, are separate from other incentives, such as cost or delivery incentives. award fee rating is final and cannot be retroactively changed.

(b) When a performance incentive is used, it shall be structured to be both positive and negative based on hardware performance after delivery and acceptance. In doing so, the contract shall establish a standard level of performance based on the salient hardware performance requirement. This standard performance level is normally the contract's minimum performance requirement. No incentive amount is earned at this standard performance level. Discrete units of measurement based on the same performance parameter shall be identified for performance both above and below the standard. Specific incentive amounts shall be associated with each performance level from maximum beneficial performance (maximum positive incentive) to minimal beneficial performance or total failure (maximum negative incentive) accordance with 1816.404-276(g)(3). The relationship between any given incentive, both positive and negative, and its associated unit of measurement should reflect the value to the Government of that level of hardware performance. The contractor should not be rewarded for above-standard performance levels that are of no benefit to the Government.

(c) The final calculation of the performance incentive shall be done when hardware performance, as defined in the contract, ceases or when the maximum positive incentive is reached. When hardware performance ceases below the standard established in the contract, the Government shall calculate the amount due and the contractor shall pay the Government that amount. Once hardware performance exceeds the standard, the contractor may request payment of the incentive amount associated with a given level of performance, provided that such payments shall not be more frequent than monthly. When hardware performance ceases above the standard level of performance, or when the maximum positive incentive is reached, the Government shall calculate the final performance incentive earned and unpaid and promptly remit it to the contractor. The exclusion at FAR 16.405(e)(3) does not apply to decisions made as to the amount(s) of positive or negative incentive. One example of how a performance incentive would work is on a contract requiring delivery of a spacecraft. In this case, the performance incentive unit of measurement could be useful months in orbit. If 12 months is the expected performance level, the 12th month could be identified as standard performance for which no incentive is earned. If 24 months is the maximum useful life for the spacecraft relative to the technical requirements, the 24th month could be identified as the maximum performance level at which the contractor would earn the maximum positive incentive. Interim measures of spacecraft life from 12 to 24 months would then be identified with fees from $0 to the maximum positive incentive. The amounts associated with these interim measures should correspond to the relative value to the Government of each additional month in orbit. A similar scale would be established for the negative incentive ranging from the 12th month for standard performance, $0, to total and immediate system failure at the start of performance, the maximum negative incentive.

(d) When the deliverable hardware lends itself to multiple, meaningful measures of performance, multiple performance incentives may be established. When the contract requires the sequential delivery of several hardware items (e.g., multiple spacecraft), separate performance incentive structures may be established to parallel the sequential delivery and use of the deliverables. the amounts of the maximum performance incentives and the total potential award fee, including any base fee, shall be in accordance with the structure and limitations specified in 18-16.404-276(g).

The definitions of standard performance, maximum positive and negative performance, and the units of measurement may be negotiated and will vary from contract to contract. Care must be taken, however, to ensure that the performance incentive structure is both reflective of the value to the Government of the various performance levels and a meaningful incentive to the contractor.

(e) In determining the value of the maximum performance incentives available, the contracting officer shall follow the following rules.

(1) The sum of the maximum positive performance incentive and other fixed or earnable fees on the contract shall not exceed the limitations in FAR 15.903(c).

(2) For an award fee contract.the maximum positive performance incentive may not exceed the limitations in FAR 15.903(d).

(i) The individual values of the maximum positive performance incentive and the total potential award fee (including any base fee) shall each be at least one-third of the total potential contract fee. The remaining one-third of the total potential contract fee may be divided between award fee and the maximum performance incentive at the discretion of the contracting officer.

(ii) The maximum negative performance incentive for research and development hardware (e.g., the first and second units) shall be equal in amount to the total earned award fee (including any base fee). The maximum negative performance incentives for production hardware (e.g., the third and all subsequent units of any hardware items) shall be equal in amount to the total potential award fee (including any base fee). Where one contract contains both cases described above, any base fee shall be allocated reasonably among the items.

(3) For cost reimbursement contracts other than award fee contracts, the maximum negative performance incentives shall not exceed the total earned fee under the contract.

1816.405 Cost-reimbursement incentive contracts.

1816.405-2 Cost-plus-award-fee (CPAF) contracts.

1816.405-270 CPAF contracts.

(a) For purposes of this subsection, "performance based contracting" means effort which can be contractually defined so that the results of the contractor's effort can be objectively measured in terms of technical and quality achievement, schedule progress or cost performance. "Nonperformance based contracting" means contractor effort that cannot be objectively measured but is evaluated based on subjective, qualitative assessments (e.g., controlling changes or interfacing with other agencies, contractors and international organizations). approved in writing by the procurement officer.

(b)(1) Normally, award fee incentives are not used when contract requirements can be defined in sufficient detail to allow for performance based contracting. If incentives are considered necessary, objectively measured incentives as described in FAR 16.402 are preferred.

(2) Award fee incentives may be used as follows:

(i) as a CPAF contract where a cost reimbursement contract is appropriate and none of the requirements can be defined to permit performance based contracting;

(ii) as a CPAF line item for nonperformance based requirements in conjunction with a non-CPAF line item(s) for performance based requirements. In this instance, fees for the performance based and nonperformance based requirements shall be developed separately IAW FAR 15-9 and 1815.9; and

(iii) under a performance based contract when it is determined to be necessary to motivate the contractor toward exceptional performance (see FAR 16.405-2(b)(ii)) and the increased level of performance justifies the additional administrative expense. When an award fee incentive is used in this instance, the basic contract type shall be other than CPAF (e.g., CPIF or FPIF). The potential award fee shall not be used to incentivize cost performance.

(3) Award fee incentives shall not be used with a cost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF) contract.

(c) Use of an award fee incentive shall be approved in writing by the procurement officer. The procurement officer's approval shall include a discussion of the other types of contracts considered and shall indicate why an award fee incentive is the appropriate choice. Normally, CPAF Award fee incentives should be used on contracts with a total estimated cost and fee greater than $2 million per year. The procurement officer may authorize use of award fee for lower-valued acquisitions, but should do so only in exceptional situations, such as contract requirements having direct health or safety impacts, where the judgmental assessment of the quality of contractor performance is critical.

1816.405-271 Base fee.

(a) A base fee shall not be used on CPAF contracts for which the periodic award fee evaluations are final (1816.405-273(a)). In these circumstances, contractor performance during any award fee period is independent of and has no effect on subsequent performance periods or the final product/results at contract completion. For other contracts, such as those fordesign, or hardware or software development, the procurement officer may authorize the use of a base fee not to exceed 3 percent. Base fee shall not be used when an award fee incentive is used in conjunction with a performance based contract structure, such as an incentive fee arrangement. contracts by making a written determination that such use is in the best interest of the Government. In such cases, a base fee of no more than 3 percent of the estimated contract cost may be included in the contract.

(b) When a base fee is authorized for use in a CPAF contract, it shall be paid only if the final award fee evaluation is "satisfactory" or better. (See 1816.405-273 and 1816.405-275evaluations and evaluation rating categories, respectively.) Pending final evaluation, base fee may be paid during the life of the contract at defined intervals on a provisional basis. If the final award fee evaluation is "poor/unsatisfactory", all provisional base fee payments shall be refunded to the Government.

1816.405-272 Award fee evaluation periods.

(a) Award fee evaluation periods should be at least 6 months in length. When appropriate, the procurement officer may authorize shorter evaluation periods after ensuring that the additional administrative costs associated with the shorter periods are offset by benefits accruing to the Government. Where practicable, such as developmental contracts with defined performance milestones (e.g., Preliminary Design Review, Critical Design Review, initial system test), procurement officer may authorize establishing evaluation periods at conclusion of the milestones rather than calendar dates, or in combination with calendar dates should be considered. In no case shall an evaluation period be longer than 12 months.

(b) A portion of the total available award fee contract shall be allocated to each of the evaluation periods. This allocation may result in an equal or unequal distribution of fee among the periods. The contracting officer should consider the nature of each contract and the incentive effects of fee distribution in determining the appropriate allocation structure. contracts for which periodic award fee evaluations are interim is for interimpurposes only. See 18-16.404-273(b) and (c).

1816.405-273 Award fee evaluations.

(a) Award fee evaluations are either interim or final. On contracts where the contract deliverable is the performance of a service over any given time period, contractor performance is often definitively measurable within each evaluation period. In these cases, all evaluations are final, and the contractor keeps the fee earned in any period regardless of the evaluations of subsequent periods. Unearned award fee in any given period in a service contract is lost and shall not be carried forward, or "rolled-over," into subsequent periods.

(b) On other contracts, such as those for end item deliverables where the true quality of contractor performance cannot be measured until the end of the contract, only the last evaluation is final. At that point, the total contract award fee pool is available, and the contractor's total performance is evaluated against the award fee plan to determine total earned award fee. In addition, interim evaluations are done to monitor performance prior to contract completion and provide feedback to the contractor on the Government's assessment of the quality of its performance. Interim evaluations are also used to establish the basis for making interim award fee payments. These interim payments are superseded by the fee determination made in the final evaluation at contract completion. The Government will then pay the contractor, or the contractor will refund to the Government, the difference between the final award fee determination and the cumulative interim fee payment.

(c) Provisional award fee payments, i.e., payments made within evaluation periods, may be included in the contract and should be negotiated on a case-by-case basis. described in 1816.404-273(a)available amount. For other contracts, tThe amount of the provisional award fee payment is determined by applying the lesser of the prior period's interim evaluation score (see 1816.405-275) or 80 percent of the fee allocated to the current period. The provisional award fee payments are superseded by the interim fee determinations made at the conclusion of each award fee performance periodat contract completion. The Government will then pay the contractor, or the contractor will refund to the Government, the difference between the final award fee determination and the cumulative provisional fee payment.

(d) The Fee Determination Official's rating for both interim and final evaluations will be provided to the contractor within 45 calendar days of the end of the period being evaluated. Any fee, interim or final, due the contractor will be paid no later than 60 calendar days after the end of the period being evaluated.

(e) Interim and final evaluations may be used to provide past performance information during the source selection process and should be marked and controlled as "Source Selection Information".

1816.405-274 Award fee evaluation factors.

(a) Explicit evaluation factors shall be established for each award fee period.

(b) Evaluation factors will be developed by the contracting officer based upon the characteristics of an individual procurement. Normally, technical and schedule considerations will be included in all CPAF contracts as evaluation factors. Cost control shall be included as an evaluation factor in all CPAF contracts. When explicit evaluation factor weightings are used, cost control shall be no less than 25 percent of the total weighted evaluation factors. not used (which should only occur on service contracts), cost control shall be a substantial factor in the performance evaluation plan. The predominant consideration of the cost control evaluation should be aobjective measurement of the contractor's performance against the negotiated estimated cost of the contract. This estimated cost may include the value of undefinitized change orders when appropriate.

(c) In rare circumstances, contract costs may increase for reasons outside the contractor's control and for which the contractor is not entitled to an equitable adjustment. One example is a weather-related launch delay on a launch support contract. The Government shall take such situations into consideration when evaluating contractor cost control.

(d) Emphasis on cost control should be balanced against other performance requirement objectives. The contractor should not be incentivized to pursue cost control to the point that overall performance is significantly degraded. For example, incentivizing an underrun that results in direct negative impacts on technical performance, safety, or other critical contract objectives is both undesirable and counterproductive. Therefore, evaluation of cost control shall conform to the following guidelines:

(1) Normally, the contractor should be given a score of 0 for cost control when there is a significant overrun within its control. However, the contractor may receive higher scores for cost control if the overrun is insignificant. Scores should decrease sharply as the size of the overrun increases. In any evaluation of contractor overrun performance, the Government shall consider the reasons for the overrun and assess the extent and effectiveness of the contractor's efforts to control or mitigate the overrun.

(2) The contractor should normally be rewarded for an underrun within its control, up to the maximum score allocated for cost control, provided the average numerical rating for all other award fee evaluation factors is 81 or greater (see 1816.405-275). An underrun shall be rewarded as if the contractor has met the estimated cost of the contract (see 1816.405-274(d)(3)) when the average numerical rating for all other factors is less than 81 but greater than 60.

(3) The contractor should be rewarded for meeting the estimated cost of the contract, but not to the maximum score allocated for cost control, to the degree that the contractor has prudently managed costs while meeting contract requirements. No award shall be given in this circumstance unless the average numerical rating for all other award fee evaluation factors is 61 or greater.

(e) When an AF arrangement is used in conjunction with a performance based contract structure (see 1816.405-270(b)(2)(iii)), the award fee’s cost control factor will only apply to a subjective assessment of the contractor’s efforts to control costs and not the actual cost outcome incentivized under the basic contract type (e.g. CPIF, FPIF).

(f) The contractor’s performance against the subcontracting plan incorporated in the contract shall also be evaluated. Small disadvantaged business utilization may be an area of particular emphasis, including the contractor’s achievements in subcontracting high technology efforts as well as the contractor’s performance under the Mentor-Protégé Program, if applicable. The evaluation weight given to subcontracting plan performance should be significant (up to 15 percent of available award fee). It should motivate the contractor to focus management attention to subcontracting with small, small disadvantaged, and women-owned small business concerns to the maximum extent practicable consistent with efficient contract performance.

(g) Only the award fee performance evaluation factors set forth in the performance evaluation plan shall be used to determine award fee scores.

(h) The Government may unilaterally modify the applicable award fee performance evaluation factors and performance evaluation areas prior to the start of an evaluation period. The contracting officer shall notify the contractor in writing of any such changes 30 days prior to the start of the relevant evaluation period.

1816.405-275 Award fee evaluation scoring.

(a) A scoring system of 0-100 shall be used for all award fee ratings. Award fee earned is determined by applying the numerical score to the award fee pool. For example, a score of 85 yields an award fee of 85 percent of the award fee pool. No award fee shall be paid unless the total score is 61 or greater.

(b) The following standard adjectival ratings and the associated numerical scores shall be used on all award fee contracts.

(1) Excellent (100-91): Of exceptional merit; exemplary performance in a timely, efficient, and economical manner; very minor (if any) deficiencies with no adverse effect on overall performance.

(2) Very good (90-81): Very effective performance, fully responsive to contract requirements accomplished in a timely, efficient, and economical manner for the most part; only minor deficiencies.

(3) Good (80-71): Effective performance; fully responsive to contract requirements; reportable deficiencies, but with little identifiable effect on overall performance.

(4) Satisfactory (70-61): Meets or slightly exceeds minimum acceptable standards; adequate results; reportable deficiencies with identifiable, but not substantial, effects on overall performance.

(5) Poor/Unsatisfactory (less than 61): Does not meet minimum acceptable standards in one or more areas; remedial action required in one or more areas; deficiencies in one or more areas which adversely affect overall performance.

(c) As a benchmark for evaluation, in order to be rated "Excellent," the contractor must be under cost, on or ahead of schedule, and have provided excellent technical performance.

(d) A scoring system appropriate for the circumstances of the individual contract requirement should be developed. Weighted scoring is recommended. In this system, each evaluation factor (e.g., technical, schedule, cost control) is assigned a specific percentage weighting with the cumulative weightings of all factors totaling 100. During the award fee evaluation, each factor is scored from 0-100 according to the ratings defined in 1816.405-275(b). The numerical score for each factor is then multiplied by the weighting for that factor to determine the weighted score. For example, if the technical factor has a weighting of 60 percent and the numerical score for that factor is 80, the weighted technical score is 48 (80 x 60 percent). The weighted scores for each evaluation factor are then added to determine the total award fee score.

1816.406 Contract clauses.

1816.406-70 NASA contract clauses.

(a) As authorized by FAR 16.406(e), the contracting officer shall insert the clause at 1852.216-76, Award Fee for Service Contracts, in solicitations and contracts when a cost-plus-award-fee contract is contemplated and the contract deliverable is the performance of a service. When provisional award fee payments are authorized, use Alternate I.

(b) As authorized by FAR 16.406(e), the contracting officer shall insert the clause at 1852.216-77, Award Fee for End Item Contracts, in solicitations and contracts when a cost-plus-award-fee contract is contemplated and the contract deliverables are a hardware or other end items for which total contractor performance cannot be measured until the end of the contract.

(c) The contracting officer may insert a clause substantially as stated at 1852.216-83, Fixed Price Incentive, in fixed-price-incentive solicitations and contracts utilizing firm or successive targets. For items subject to incentive price revision, identify the target cost, target profit, target price, and ceiling price for each item.

(d) The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 1852.216-84, Estimated Cost and Incentive Fee, in cost-plus-incentive-fee solicitations and contracts.

(e) The contracting officer may insert the clause at 1852.216-85, Estimated Cost and Award Fee, in cost-plus-award-fee solicitations and contracts. When the contract includes performance incentives, use Alternate I.

(f) As provided at 1816.402-270, the contracting officer shall insert a clause substantially as stated at 1852.216-88, Performance Incentive, when the primary deliverable(s) is (are) hardware and total estimated cost and fee is greater than $25 million. A clause substantially as stated at 1852.216-88 may be included in lower dollar value hardware contracts with the approval of the procurement officer.

Subpart 1816.5--Indefinite-Delivery Contracts

1816.504 Indefinite quantity contracts.

(a)(4)(ii) ID/IQ service contract values and task order values shall be expressed only in dollars.

1816.505 Ordering.

(a)(2) Task and delivery orders shall be issued by the contracting officer.

(b)(4) The Agency and installation ombudsmen designated in accordance with 1815.70 shall review complaints from contractors on task order contracts and delivery order contracts.

1816.505-70 Task ordering.installation issuing the solicitation and its resultant contract. See subpart 1815.70 and 1852.215-84.

(a) The contracting officer shall, to the maximum extent possible, state task order requirements in terms of functions and the related performance and quality standards such that the standards may be objectively measured.

(b) To the maximum extent possible, contracting officers shall solicit contractor task plans to use as the basis for finalizing task order requirements and enable evaluation and pricing of the contractor's proposed work on a performance based approach as described in 1816.404-270(a).

(c) Task order contract type shall be individually determined, based on the nature of each task order's requirements.

(1) Task orders may be grouped by contract type for administrative convenience (e.g., all CPIF orders, all FFP orders, etc.) for contractor progress and cost reporting.

(2) Under multiple awards, solicitations for individual task plans shall request the same pricing structure from all offerors.

(d) Any undefinitized task order issued under paragraph (f) of the clause at 1852.216-80, Task Ordering Procedure, shall be treated and reported as an undefinitized contract action in accordance with 1843-70.

1816.506-70 NASA contract clause.

Insert the clause at 1852.216-80, Task Ordering Procedure, in solicitations and contracts when an indefinite-delivery, task order contract is contemplated. The clause is applicable to both fixed-price and cost-reimbursement type contracts. If the contract does not require 533M reporting (See NHB 9501.2), use the clause with its Alternate I.

Subpart 1816.6--Time-and-Materials, Labor-Hour, and Letter Contracts

1816.603 Letter contracts.

iclauses prescribed in FAR 16.603-4, the following information, must be included in all letter contracts:

Statement of work.

Delivery or performance schedule and place(s) of inspection and acceptance.

A statement that no profit or fee shall be paid under the letter contract except as provided in the Termination clause (see 18-15.971).

1816.603-370 Approvals.

(a) Master Buy Plan submission(1)contracts is delegated to the procurement officer. Each All requests for authority to issue a letter contract shall include the following:

(1) Proposed contractor's name and address.

(2) Location where contract is to be performed.

(3) Contract number, including modification number, if applicable.

(4) Brief description of the work or services to be performed.

(5) Performance period or delivery schedule.

(6) Amount of letter contract.

(7) Performance period of letter contract.

(8) Estimated total amount of definitive contract.

(9) Type of definitive contract to be executed.

(10) A statement that the definitive contract will contain all required clauses or identification of specific clause deviations that have been approved.

(11) A statement as to the necessity and advantage to the Government of the proposed letter contract.

(12) The definitization schedule described in FAR 16.603-2(c) expected to be negotiated with the contractor.

(b) Requests for authority to issue letter contracts having an estimated definitive contract amount equal to or greater than the Master Buy Plan submission thresholds of 1807.7101 (or modifications thereto) shall be signed by the procurement officer and submitted to the Associate Administrator for Procurement (Code HS) for approval.

(2) Any modification of an undefinitized letter contract approved under (b)(1)of this section must be approved by the Associate Administrator for Procurement.

(c) Authority to approve the issuance of letter contracts below the Master Buy Plan submission thresholds specified in 1807.7101 is delegated to the procurement officer.

(d) Any modification of an undefinitized letter contract approved by a procurement officer in accordance with paragraph (c) of this section that increases the estimated definitized contract amount to or above the Master Buy Plan submission thresholds must have the prior approval of the Associate Administrator for Procurement (Code HS).

Contract, in contracts definitizing letter contracts.

Previous Page TOC Next Page